June 20, 2002 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 29


The House met at 10:00 a.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you to the wonderful men, women and children of the great District of Placentia & St. Mary's who have sent me here to the House of Assembly. It has been an honour and a privilege to serve my constituents in this hon. House.

Before I go any further, I want to say thanks to my family, my friends, supporters, and concerned citizens of the great and historic District of Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: To all those who have participated in my consultation process, no matter what your opinion was, I say thank you.

Mr. Speaker, allow me a moment to publicly thank the most patient woman in the world, my wife, Sandra -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: - who, any day now, will give birth to our third child. I guarantee you, Mr. Speaker, if we are lucky enough to have our little girl, her name won't be Voisey.

To my caucus, I say thank you for all the support you have given me over the past weeks and months. To my leader, Danny Williams, our leader, I say thank you for the support and the leadership you have shown me in the past year. I thank you for giving me the opportunity today to stand in this House and have a free vote -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: - on an important topic to all Newfoundland and Labrador, but very important to the people I represent in this House.

I want to say here, Mr. Speaker, that I am proud to be part of the Progressive Conservative Party of Newfoundland and Labrador, and proud to be part of the Danny Williams team.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Last Tuesday, Mr. Speaker, I attended a news conference at the Fairmont Hotel for the announcement on the Voisey's Bay development. When I left, it reminded me of a story I would like to relay, of when you would be coming home and you would go up to the door of your house and you could smell the raisin buns that mom had in the oven. They smelled really good. When you got in and mom took the buns out of the oven and laid them on the table, and you cut them open and realized that for some reason or other mom didn't put the raisins in, they still smelled good. Even as you spread the butter on and ate them, afterwards, it was great but there were no raisons in them.

When I look back on the promises that were made to the people in my district in 1996, the promises that were made to the people in Argentia and Placentia of a full-fledged smelter and refinery, I thought on that story, because now we have the bun but we do not have the raisins.

Later that evening, I put in place and announced the most comprehensive consultation process I have ever undertaken as a Member of the House of Assembly, and I believe, Mr. Speaker, on this particular issue, of any member here in the House. I felt it was necessary because of the roller coaster ride in my district since 1996. This process consisted of mail-in ballots, town hall meetings, key stakeholder consultations, individual verbal briefs, individual written briefs. To say it was successful is an understatement. It was phenomenal. It was phenomenal how many people came out and took part in the process, Mr. Speaker. It gave them the opportunity to raise issues and concerns, and for me to hear the issues and concerns of my district, and there are many with this development.

There are environmental issues, especially in the Town of Fox Harbour, where I sat with the town council, where they, Mr. Speaker, are in the ways of prevailing winds of Argentia. Other environmental concerns have been raised also: concerns with education and the training requirements needed for this great development; the employment opportunities for workers, unemployed workers in many cases, in my district; contractors; concerns with the royalty regime; concerns from the fishing industry, especially in Placentia and St. Mary's Bay; concerns from senior citizens, with the cost of living increases; concerns with ore leaving the Province; the what ifs and the maybes; the need for stronger guarantees; and, most importantly, Mr. Speaker, the community and regional benefits that we hope to receive in our area. The list goes on and on.

Through it all, people were given the opportunity to voice their concerns, raise the issues, but most importantly were given the opportunity to tell me how they wished me to vote on this agreement.

Mr. Speaker, my district has suffered greatly: the closure of the Long Harbour phosphorous plant, followed by the closure of the Argentia naval base, and we all know what happened with the shutdown of the fishery. My district is no different. Out-migration has taken its toll on my people.

Mr. Speaker, in 1991, in the Town of Placentia there was a population of 5,515 people. In 1996, that population fell to 5,013. In the last census of 2001, the population was 4,426.

Mr. Speaker, I, and all the development agencies in my district, are looking for answers to the economic problems. Will this agreement address some of these concerns? Yes, but we have to deal with reality. The hopes and dreams of the people I represent are up here again. We have to realize that there need to be other avenues to create economic activity. Even though Voisey's Bay is positive for my district, it will not answer all the woes.

Do I have concerns with this agreement, Mr. Speaker? Definitely. I am very concerned about some of the wording in the Statement of Principles. In reviewing this Statement of Principles, I went back to one of my old jobs - my first job, as a matter of fact - that of a truck driver. I took the truck and I drove her, in my mind, right through the following words, clauses and phrases: suitable financing; best efforts; on a financially prudent basis; bankable feasibility studies; other relevant factors; confidential progress reports; Exemption Orders; prior to the cessation of mining operation; government entitled to claim damages; as soon as practical; lower electrical power rate; ship ore out of the Province; allow additional ore out, if; taxes lowered, in all provinces average; and, the government will undertake to indemnify the proponent.

Mr. Speaker, these are off-ramps or the yellow lights. I say this to the Premier and to the government in the true spirit of democracy and in my role as an Opposition member: Beware of those caution lights as you cruise Yonge Street and Bay Street between now and the end of September.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: These are just fifteen off-ramps that a former truck driver like myself could find.

It was and is my job to listen and respect, where possible, the wishes of my constituents. My campaign promise of 1999, Mr. Speaker, was listening to the people. I would be less than honest if I did not say I have concerns about this agreement. I worry that the benefits promised to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, the benefits promised to the people of Placentia and St. Mary's, will not materialize. I agree with our leader, that the guarantees are not what they should be, but I have to deal with the realities of the people of my district, and the realities of the people of Argentia and Placentia in particular. There is a lot of hardship in this area of my district. Unemployment is in the area of 70 per cent. According to the last census, as I just touched on, there are less than 1,300 people there today than in 1991. The classrooms of Laval school are much emptier than they were ten years ago, and you cannot drive very far without seeing a boarded-up home or a shop that has been closed down. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, those are the realities that I deal with in my office on a daily basis.

You see, the people in my district have hopes and dreams that have not been realized through the last thirteen years of this Liberal government. Without Voisey's Bay, they will have no chance to secure their hopes and dreams in the short term, and while we may never have anything more than a pilot plant in Argentia, at least it is something to grasp hold of today. At least it provides those people with a chance, and everybody deserves a chance. Believe you me, the people of Placentia and St. Mary's, the people of Placentia and Argentia, deserve a chance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: I hope and pray, Mr. Speaker, that one day we will have that commercial plant, employing hundreds and hundreds of people. I welcome Inco to my area and advise them that I will continue to act in the best interests of all the people I represent. In my heart of hearts, I sincerely believe that if we have to wait another five, seven, or ten years for a deal on Voisey's Bay, there will be no one left to fill the jobs in Argentia, from my area. The people will all have packed up and left.

Just as I used to wait for my mother's raisin buns, so too are the people of Argentia and Placentia waiting for these jobs. So, Mr. Speaker, despite my reservations and concerns, I cannot say no to any number of jobs in an area plagued by 70 per cent unemployment. Despite the reservations and concerns that I share with my caucus, I have to stand up for my district, one of the few districts that will benefit from the development of Voisey's Bay, and today I will vote in favour of this deal.

Mr. Speaker, I want to send out a warning, and I want to quote from a lady I talked to at a gas pump in Placentia last week. She said to me: I heard the deal is done. Now, Fabian, you and your party have done a great job as watchdogs on this government. It is now more important than ever that we need you to watch them and make sure that promises made are promises kept, that commitments made are commitments kept.

I want to address the several hundreds of people who asked me to vote against this deal from my own district. In a position I find myself in today, I cannot vote both ways but I have to respect the wishes of the majority of people who have sent those wishes to me through my consultation process. I respect the right of anybody who has an opinion. I respect the right of anybody who differs from my opinion, but the decision is mine to make today and I make it in favour of this agreement.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank, once again, all the people who have been part of my public life since I entered politics almost ten years ago. This is one of the hardest decisions I have had to face since I became a member of this House. I want to thank, once again, my leader, Danny Williams, for giving me the opportunity to do so, free and without reservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, a very difficult decision to say the least. It is not today that worries me. It is not today that concerns me. What I have to do here in the House today, I do it on behalf of the people who put me here. It is when I look back in fifteen or twenty years time and make sure and feel that I made the right decision today. The people have entrusted me. It is not my views or opinions that count, it is the people who put me here. They have expressed their views and opinions to me and I intend to honour their wishes here today.

I hope the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and some of the people in the District of Placentia & St. Mary's, do not see my vote as a glowing endorsement for this deal because it is not. My vote is an expression of hope for the people of my district. My vote is an expression of hope to follow the dreams of the people of the District of Placentia & St. Mary's. I pray to God that their hope will be realized. I pray to God that rock solid commitments of Inco and this government, this time around, are more than just the words and more rock solid than the words of 1996. For as I tell my children, Mr. Speaker, I tell Inco and this government, the smallest action is greater than the grandest intention.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: I want to say in closing, Mr. Speaker, I say to the government, that I will continue and I will ensure over the next several years the promises that have been made to people in my district are kept. That the commitments that have been made to the people in my district are honoured, and if they are not, and I say in all honesty, I will rally the troops in the District of Placentia & St. Mary's and I will let the people know in this House and this Province that this government will not be (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, in 1996 with the promise of a better tomorrow, with the promises of Brian Tobin, the former Premier, and the promises that he put forward in the election of 1996, I lost an election. I lost an election in 1996 because people, once again, were told of the dreams, the possibilities and the aspirations that may come. It was a hard act to follow. I will be brutally honest, Mr. Speaker, it was a hard act to follow, because when people get the opportunity to have employment, when people who have been unemployed for several years get the opportunity to have a better life it is hard to fight that. Those promises were made in 1996 by Brian Tobin and I, as I said, lost an election on that.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say now, I was in Placentia last week at the news conference when the Premier and his company came to town and the people in Placentia are delighted with this announcement. The people in the Argentia area are delighted but they are cautiously optimistic. They are not jumping up and down in the streets like they were in 1996. They are going to make sure that they develop along with this project in due course.

Mr. Speaker, with the decision and the vote that I will make here today on behalf of the people who put me in this House of Assembly, on behalf of the people who entrusted me with expressing their views and opinions, my only feeling today is that in my heart and soul I hope I have made the right decision.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, it is an honour for me to be able to stand in this House to speak about the great Voisey's Bay deal. I am sure it is a tough decision for all to look at the deal but I can say one thing here, and I can say it for the people of the Bay of Islands, if the Premier of this Province wants to bring 600 jobs to the Bay of Islands it will not be a tough decision for me to vote for it, Premier, I can assure you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: I say to the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, just remember you are supporting the leader who last night stood in this House - and I was flabbergasted - and said: If you are going to get direct benefits for adjacency, vote for it, because it is going to help. Everybody else who is not, shouldn't vote for it. And you are supporting that leader here this morning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: I can tell the Leader of the Opposition, I can tell this honourable House, Mr. Speaker, that the people of the Bay of Islands district which I represent are a proud people. They will not ask me to, nor would I ever, vote against a deal that will support some other part of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for the Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, the District of the Bay of Islands would never ask me to vote against the deal because it is going to bring prosperity to some other part of Newfoundland and Labrador, nor would I ever vote against the deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: The Statement of Principles, Mr. Speaker, has been debated all across this Province, on every possible news network, radio, TV, ads, everywhere possible. So, for me to get into this again would be just going over the same old stuff that everybody here in this House has heard, everybody in the Province.

I just want to take a different tune, because I remember the Leader of the Opposition saying: Consult with your people, vote with your district, listen to what the people have to say. This has become a political issue, a very political issue, and the people of the Bay of Islands are well aware of the politics. Just to show how political, Mr. Speaker, I would like to go back to Hansard and put this in perspective about how political this has been.

I will read from Hansard, Mr. Speaker, "‘The Liberal government with a new mandate will maintain a firm position on behalf of the people of our province that there will be no mine at Voisey's Bay unless a smelter and refinery are build in our province.' That is exactly what the Red Book said, and that is our position."

It goes on to say, "I ask the hon. Member for Placentia & St. Mary's: What is it that the people down in his district are saying? What are they telling you? What are the people of Placentia & St. Mary's telling you?

"I can totally understand where the Leader of the Opposition may want to play politics with this. I can understand where the incoming leader may want to play politics with this because he is not here yet, but I truly do not understand why the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's would want to let himself be hung out to dry by his Party. That is the thing that amazes me, Mr. Speaker. I really do not understand that at all.

"The other day when I was responding to the Speech from the Throne, I commented that all the hon. members in the House needed to be accountable to the people who elected them. I think it is time for the hon. Member for Placentia & St. Mary's to be accountable to the people who elected him. I challenge the hon. member."

"...what is the real agenda for the Opposition here? They are not interested in having a negotiated deal on Voisey's Bay. They are more interested in participating in partisan politics and trying to make a major issue of this to their own political end."

"Now, one of the fundamental things here is that we need to understand that we are, as a Province, in a set of negotiations with Inco. I think it is about time that the Opposition recognize that in any set of negotiations you start out with an objective. Let me read again an excerpt from the Speech from the Throne last week, and I quote, ‘My Government sees opportunity in the development of the resources at Voisey's Bay. We have the confidence to move forward and we will resume negotiations. We are not afraid to reach a deal because no deal will be signed that cannot be clearly explained and defended. My Government has one basic objective for the negotiations' - and this is critical, and it is something we need to keep in mind - ‘Any deal must provide maximum benefits to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador."

Mr. Speaker, who is that from? The Member for Trinity North, these are the statements that he made in this House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, as we can see, this is becoming a very political issue. I looked at it, Doug Moores is supporting this deal. I heard the Leader of the Opposition stand up and say: I have been in law for thirty years. It is from a bit of research that I did, that when he signed to the Bar, Doug Moores's name was right under his. So, Doug Moores has just as much experience as you, Sir, and he supports the deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: John Crosbie, another former PC supporter; Leo Power, another strong PC supporter.

When consultation came up, the Premier said: Go out and consult. Be comfortable with yourself. Be comfortable with yourself on what this deal means to you and your district and to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Be comfortable.

Being a constituent man, like I am, and very connected to the District of the Bay of Islands, I went out and started consulting. I will just name a few people I have spoken to. I spoke to Don Johnson, a good friend of mine, a very good advisor. I spoke to Hayward Brake. I spoke to Eric Humber, all business people whom I consulted. One of the issues that came up was this Force Majeure. Now, I am not a lawyer and I do not profess to be a lawyer. I will leave that to the experts. Hayward Brake is a man who probably has 200 people employed, contracts all around the Province, contracts in Quebec, doing work. I said: Hayward, what does that mean? He said: Here is what it means. I said: Make it simply so people like me, the lay person, can understand. He said: Here is what that means. I am doing a contract of laying some cable between Corner Brook and Pasadena. In the contract, it takes one month for me to do it. In that month, if there is a forest fire in that area, the contract is stopped, and once the forest fire ends, the extension is put on the end of my time. That is in every standard contract that I write. That is the simplest way I can put it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: I also take exception, Mr. Speaker, and I ask the Opposition House Leader, if he really believes in what he said last night in voting with your conscience, and people should question with their conscience, I ask the Opposition House Leader to speak to his own leader for making the statement that the backbenchers, the government, are going to have their arms twisted to vote for this deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!!

MR. JOYCE: That we are going to get our arms twisted. I can assure this hon. House, and I can assure every person in this great District of Bay of Islands, that Eddie Joyce will not get his arm twisted by any member if the deal is not good for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: I went off and consulted the residents of the Bay of Islands. Again, I profess I am not a lawyer, so I gave them the Statement of Principles and I went to two lawyers, two friends of mine, and said: Read it and give me your honest opinion. They came back to me and I said: Be honest, be up front. Tell me what you really think.

Their final analysis to me was that if they had to go into a court of law, in layman terms, if they had to go into a court of law with the Statement of Principles that was handed to them, they would not even ask for a retainer fee because they would win 100 per cent of the time in the court of law in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: That was two lawyers, Mr. Speaker, two lawyers.

I contacted many residents in the Bay of Islands. I will just read some statements that some of them made. Sherman Wheeler, a local contractor in the District of Bay of Islands. I said: Sherman, what do you think of the deal? He said: It is great. How many people in this district worked at Hibernia, union workers? There are going to be union workers at the construction site. So, me, as a private contractor, when they move out, I am going to move in and do a lot of their work. It is a great deal for the District of Bay of Islands.

I asked Alec Park. Alec Park is a another business person who raised his family in Cox's Cove, who built his own business in Cox's Cove, who stayed in Cox's Cove, rural Newfoundland and Labrador, who is doing work all over the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I said: Alec, what do you think of the deal? Alec Park's comment: It is the best deal since Confederation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: That was a business person who stayed in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. Mayor John Pye, Mayor of Mount Moriah: It is a great deal, a great deal. Mayor Harley Anderson of Meadows: Get on with the deal. What are you waiting for? Get on with the deal. Dave Wells; Dave Wells was a union man all his life. Dave Wells worked at Hibernia, worked at Bull Arm. He worked all his life in the union. I said: What do you think of the deal from a union perspective? He said: It is great to get people back to work. It is great to give people hope. It is great to be able to create the jobs on a long-term basis. Clarence Galliott, a union leader all his life, what did Clarence Galliott say? It is great for the workers of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, great for the whole area, great for the District of Bay of Islands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Just in case, Mr .Speaker, somewhere along the line - a lot of those people are my friends - they did not want to really tell me, which I doubt, because they always speak the truth to me, but just in case, I just want to read some other things that were sent to me, where I have been contacted. I have to straighten out a few things in this House.

The Leader of the Opposition, here is what he said on VOCM, on the talk show - and I am very fortunate that I am Corner Brook and I can hear what is going on in Corner Brook, and when I am in St. John's I can hear what is going on in St. John's. I am very fortunate. It is a great advantage.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Was he talking about the two streets then, or what?

MR. JOYCE: Oh, no.

Here is what he said. We are talking about the Mayor, Priscilla Boutcher, in Corner Brook. Here is what he said: So, I started to go down through with her, you know. You could tell obviously, by the silence on the other side of the phone, that she had serious reservations. I am not going to put words in her mouth but he don't mind trying to read her mind.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, here is what the Mayor of the City of Corner Brook actually said: Pleased, pleased that the Statement of Principles is signed. That means it is now time for people in the area to gain the employment and the economic benefits the deal will provide. That is what the Mayor of Corner Brook said.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: The Leader of the Opposition - again, it is great to be in St. John's and Corner Brook because you hear the stories, you hear the twists, you hear the different opinions. You always hear it, Mr. Speaker, and it is some nice to be able to say it.

The Leader of the Opposition, The Telegram, "The greatest failure of the tentative agreement, Williams said, is the benefits to the province - only $280 million over the 30-year life of the project." In Corner Brook - I guess he assumes that the media in St. John's does not reach Corner Brook - the Opposition says that the main reason for the deal, because there is no guarantee. In St. John's he is saying one reason why the deal is a failure and in Corner Brook he has another number one reason, Mr. Speaker. I guess I am a bit privileged, but I can see both sides of his face.

Again, I consulted with some people in Corner Brook, Mark Sexton, Corner Brook Economic Development Corporation. He was a former member of the Humber East PC Association, Vice-President of the Humber East PC Association. Here is what Mark Sexton said, "From our corporation's perspective, we're tremendously excited. N o matter how it gets debated out in the coming months, it's going to have a positive impact on the province, and that includes Corner Brook.... I think there are some good supply and service activities and staging opportunities available to this area."

AN HON. MEMBER: Who's constituent is he?

MR. JOYCE: He is Mr. Mercer's.

Bill Lundrigan, past and Acting President of the Corner Brook Chamber of Commerce: You wonder why I am supporting this deal? "He thinks Voisey's Bay is a good deal and will have a great impact on the area... They've settled with the native groups and it opens up a whole host of opportunities for businesses and people in Newfoundland. That definitely includes this area, he added... The provincial government's got an adjacency agreement with Inco whereby they're not going to give preference to local people...".

MR. TAYLOR: (Inaudible).

MR. JOYCE: If you want to talk about St. Anthony, the Member for The Straits & White Bay North brought up St. Anthony. He said a paltry 600 jobs.

These are not my words. These are the words of Ernest Simms, the Mayor of the Town of St. Anthony: People in the region who have skills will be able to work at the mine site in Northern Labrador for various lengths of time and still maintain their homes and family connections in places like St. Anthony. As for the potential opportunities in providing the massive project with products and services, most people can really comprehend the significance of the spinoffs. We need to work together more with people in Newfoundland and Labrador and their communities. I would also suggest that the economics of this project means that the Province will be in a better position to invest in the underdeveloped areas like the Northern Peninsula. That is what your mayor said, I say to the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: A person who can help every person in this House, Mr. Randy Simms, President of the Newfoundland Federation of Municipalities, someone who will affect every person in this House of Assembly, just about every resident in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Here is what Randy Simms had to say in The Western Star: We are asking the federal government to commit that any revenues set aside for municipalities will be excluded from equalization clawback. This means that more money stays in the Province rather than being cut from equalization payments. If the federal government agrees it may well mean a significant financial boost to the 291 municipalities across the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: That is what Randy said. That is what he said.

Bob Kelly, Executive Director of the Chamber of Minerals, the guy who is in the field, read what he says and (inaudible) - feel that there are opportunities here to be had in the Bay St. George area from the Voisey's Bay development. He told a group of Rotarians at the regular luncheon meeting that it is already known that Atlantic Minerals in Lower Cove will supply about forty tons of limestone per year to the hydromet to be constructed in Argentia. That is what he said.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: The Mines and Energy critic was out in Stephenville. Again, it is great to be in Corner Brook where you get what they say, in here they say it completely opposite: the Tories will launch an advertising campaign to pressure the Province to release the terms of the deal. Here they are standing over there criticizing us, because we sent every household in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador a copy of the deal and the benefits. Here you are criticizing, while he was out in Stephenville saying that it should be done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. JOYCE: Jamie Schwartz, Manager of the Deer Lake Regional Airport Authority, very supportive of the deal in the Deer Lake area. Dwight Ball, President of the Chamber of Commerce in Deer Lake: Deer Lake proximity to Labrador infrastructure will help capitalize on economic spinoffs. The business communities in Labrador will have to provide support services for the development, will form some linkages with businesses here. Of course, I am not just talking about Deer Lake, but also communities around the region, like Corner Brook and Stephenville, will benefit from this development.

Gary Gale, a mayor, a person who just ran for the PC nomination, a full supporter of the deal. I will just read his last comment. He is the Mayor of Hampden who ran for the PC nomination in the Humber Valley district. There is a lot of optimism being generated and I think it is not only good in reference to Voisey's Bay but also with regard to the general economic climate in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, the Premier said: Go consult your constituents. I did. Go consult the people to whom it is going to mean the most, the business community which is going to keep the economic viability in this Province. I did.

Mr. Speaker, I proudly stand here today and say I will support the deal. I proudly stand here today and support the Premier of the Province and the Mines and Energy Minister for a deal that was well done. I say to the people of Bay of Islands, if it is good for Newfoundland and Labrador, if is good for the District of Bay of Islands, then I stand with the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure today that I rise in this House of Assembly - I would ask the Member for Windsor-Springdale to be quiet because this is serious business. I have twenty minutes and I want to represent the views of my constituents in this honourable House. He had his opportunity and I am sure that we all listened to what he had to say.

It is a pleasure to stand here and support this deal for the development of the Voisey's Bay mineral deposit. Thirteen years two months ago, the people of the great District of Bellevue elected me to this House of Assembly, and they re-elected me three times afterwards, to represent their views and express their views in this great institution of ours. As a young guy, as a person who grew up in the great Placentia Bay, one of the great bays of Newfoundland, on a small island in Placentia Bay, a bay where people worked very, very hard for a living, the son of a logger who spent many, many days and months away from home in Millertown and Badger and all those places eking out a living. People who worked very, very hard, as my father did; who worked very, very hard to ensure that he provided the necessary things in life for his family; who died when I was nine years old; who always instilled in me a very great work ethic and a very great dedication to the people here that we should serve.

Last night I sat in this House of Assembly and I heard the Leader of the Opposition, Danny Williams, say: I stand here today, I stand here today - the hon. Leader of the Opposition. I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, but I had to leave this hon. House last night. He stood and said: I have a bad feeling in my stomach. I fear terribly. Well, I can tell you during my lifetime I had a lot of pains in my stomach but I can tell you the day that I said to this caucus: I support this deal, there was no pain in my stomach.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: I did not leave Woody Island with $500 in my pocket or a battered up old station wagon. I left Woody Island because at that time we had a great Liberal government in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have heard so much over the last two or three weeks about the bad deals that Joey Smallwood made. The tremendous giveaways of the resources of this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Well, I am a resource within this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I can tell you, to every member in this House of Assembly today, without the policies of a Liberal government and a Joey Smallwood, I would not be standing here today. I would not be standing here today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: The economic activities of the 1960s that was generated by the Liberal government - and I would ask the hon. Member for St. John's West to be quiet because this is very, very important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I want to get a message to you people today of how important the Liberal government and what Joey Smallwood did for this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Because of the policies of his Liberal government there was free tuition, free tuition in Newfoundland and Labrador when I went to university. Not only that, but the last year in university we got paid $100 a month to go, because of the great work of Joey Smallwood. I can tell you, as an orphan who grew up on Woody Island I would never have had the opportunity of getting a post-secondary education in Newfoundland and Labrador. I want to be a part of a government that is there for the little people.

The Leader of the Opposition last week said: Can we let the little people of Newfoundland and Labrador decide such a major issue? There is nobody in Newfoundland and Labrador who are little. My father who worked in the lumber woods, and the people in Placentia Bay - and we have groups here from Placentia Bay. When I drove down to Placentia last Tuesday, and when I arrived, just before we got to Dunville, and there were cars all over the place, my first reaction was, there must be an accident. Then I looked and saw the look on the people's faces in the area, and the smiles on the people's faces in the area.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not smirks.

MR. BARRETT: Not smirks. They weren't on any picket fence. They saw hope. These hard-working people in Placentia Bay saw hope for the future.

The parade started down through the community, and when I was going down through that community there were no pains in my stomach, but, I can tell you, the shivers were going down my spine.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: I was so happy for the people. I was driving by and, on a bicycle, I saw a young kid. A young boy, on his bicycle, was just getting out of school and the bookbag was on his back. I looked at him. I was driving in the car by myself, and I said to myself: Percy, thirteen years in politics, this is what it is all about. That is the future of Newfoundland and Labrador, this young boy on the bicycle. I said to myself that I hope this project will bring a future and prosperity to this young boy.

That is why all of us sit in this House of Assembly. That is why all of us make the difficult decisions that we have to make. When we look at this project and we know that 79,000 person years of employment will be gained for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, we know that there are going to be a lot of kids on bicycles with their school bags on their backs who are going to be affected by this project. That does not give me a pain in my stomach. It makes me feel proud to be part of a government that is committed to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: We have heard, over the last two or three weeks - I have talked to a lot of people and I have listened to a lot of newscasts. I have spent a lot of time in the car so I had an opportunity to listen to a lot of the people on the Open Line programs.

I heard a former Member of this House of Assembly talking about the mistakes of Joey Smallwood, God rest his soul; I hope he rests in peace. He talked about the Come By Chance Refinery and what a grave mistake it was: Joey Smallwood and the Come By Chance Refinery. I don't know where he was coming from. I was confused. I was driving from my district and I passed along the parking lot of the Come By Chance Refinery and it was full. The parking lot was full. The Come By Chance Refinery - the hon. member used to be the hon. Member for St. John's East Extern - is operating. It is operating today, as I speak. There are 600 people working at the Come By Chance Refinery.

AN HON. MEMBER: Paltry.

MR. BARRETT: A paltry 600 people working at the Come By Chance Refinery. People from the great District of Bellevue; the great District of Trinity North; the great District of Harbour Main-Whitbourne; Port de Grave; Carbonear-Harbour Grace. People travel in every morning.

Out in my district, if you were to pass between Long Harbour and Come By Chance at 6:00 or 7:00 in the morning, it is busier than Water Street, and we had a gentleman saying that Joey Smallwood made such a tremendous mistake getting involved with the Come By Chance Refinery. A $40 million payroll every year, and this gentleman was spreading the propaganda, associating the Come By Change Refinery to Voisey's Bay.

It is amazing what some people will not do in the name of politics. Forty million dollars, and do you know something? That refinery, within the last five or six years, has spent $200 million, a paltry $200 million, in capital improvements; 600 permanent employees. Fourteen hundred people directly - directly - in the districts that I just mentioned, get their livelihood from the Come By Chance Refinery, and in the propaganda that was spread out in the last couple of weeks by members opposite, and former members opposite, it was a great mistake of Joey Smallwood's government.

There is great support in my district for this project. I travelled around and attended meetings in Clarenville with my great friend, former friend -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. BARRETT: - who crossed over to the other side because he said: I cannot agreed with the government's approach to Voisey's Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: If he wanted to come back, I would walk out of the caucus if you took him back, Mr. Premier.

Great support in the District of Trinity North. I was in Marystown with the Premier and the two other members from the Burin Peninsula. One hundred and eighty people turned out, people from the Fortune Bay part of my district. People travelled extensive distances in my district to go to Marystown.

AN HON. MEMBER: The Mayor of Grand Le Pierre (inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: The Mayor of Grand Le Pierre and the Mayor of English Harbour East and the development associations, all these people travelled to Marystown. They are not affected by the adjacency, but they see it as a very positive thing for Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Do you know something? I listened to the hon. member for St. Mary's, the Capes, and I heard about his raisin buns. I heard about his raisin buns. I had them too. I had them when I was growing up.

AN HON. MEMBER: Still eats them.

MR. BARRETT: I still eat them whenever I get a chance, with butter on them. There was a thing on Woody Island, and he said that - my mother always said to me: Percy, don't stand on that picket fence. Don't sit on the picket fence, Percy. Don't sit on it, because that wood has splinters in it and it will be all over you, and you know that Come By Chance hospital is a great distance away.

I never say anybody this morning who ever sat on a picket fence so much as he did, when you are talking about Argentia and Placentia, when you are talking about thousands of jobs, thousands of jobs in Argentia in construction, and a facility that, when it is completed, will be equivalent to the Come By Chance Refinery.

He talked about the traffic lights. He talked about traffic lights in this deal. Well, I would say that within the next three or four years, when we look at the people who are going to be travelling from the District of Harbour Main-Whitbourne and the District of Port de Grave and Carbonear-Harbour Grace, the District of Bellevue, we are probably going to have to put a traffic light at the intersection going down to Placentia to control the traffic with all those people going to work in Argentia and Placentia.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Now I, as the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, would rather be facing the difficulty today of whether I am going to put a traffic light at the Argentia access road, and now to talk about the traffic lights that he talked about in the Voisey's Bay deal.

AN HON. MEMBER: What about the off-ramps?

MR. BARRETT: The off-ramps? Look, there are no off-ramps in this deal. There are no off-ramps in this deal.

MS S. OSBORNE: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: I listened to all the things that you say over there about the off-ramps. I heard the hon. Member for St. John's West. Now that she has spoken to me, I want to address it.

I read the flyer that she sent out to her constituents. I heard her on the Open Line program, saying: I sent out the information on the Voisey's Bay deal to my constituents. I sent out the Principles. I sent out the Principles.

If you are going to let the constituents decide what is in the deal, you send the deal out, don't you? What you sent out was nothing but propaganda. Everything that you leader said against the deal, that is what was in your flyer. If you are going to be honest with your constituents - and I want to remind the hon. member, I have a lot of friends who live in St. John's West. They never got the Voisey's Bay deal in their mail. They got your version of the Voisey's Bay

deal, which is the Opposition Tory deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: So I would say to you, if you want to talk about sending out information to your constituents, get it right!

MS S. OSBORNE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for St. John's West.

MS S. OSBORNE: At no time did I say that I sent out the deal. I said that we had read the Statement of Principles and had concerns with them. No way did I say I sent out the deal.

I live in the district represented by the Minister of Mines and Energy. I did not get the deal either, just a glossy (inaudible) piece of propaganda (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MR. BARRETT: To the hon. the Member for St. John's West, I wasn't going to bring that up. That was not going to be part of my address, but she indicated that - you know, she was shouting out across the House of Assembly - she said she wanted her constituents to be informed, so you sent out the Danny Williams version of Voisey' Bay. You didn't send out what has been negotiated. You sent out the Danny Williams version and you have -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I want to remind the hon. members that when reference is made to any member of this House, it ought to be done by the office that they hold or the district that they represent.

MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker -

MS J.M. AYLWARD: She took the off-ramp.

MR. BARRETT: She took the off-ramp. She is just trying to use up my time, that is all.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: I just want to take a couple of minutes, by leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BARRETT: I just want to thank the minister and all the (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS M. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today as we take part in an historic debate on the Statement of Principles between the Province and Inco to develop our resources at Voisey's Bay. As a member of a rural district that has seen its share of good times, as well as the bad, I am pleased that such a Statement of Principles could be achieved to lead into a Voisey's Bay deal that I believe will be of huge benefit to the areas of not just Argentia and Labrador but many parts of the Island, including the District of Burin-Placentia West.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate our Premier, Premier Grimes, the Minister of Mines and Energy, Inco, and their negotiating teams, for striking a balance to get this historic deal underway, a deal for rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, this news was certainly welcomed in my district last week. Last week, I spent sometime in my district. I visited the malls there. I visited the shipyard, now owned by Kiewit, and the Cow Head facility. I visited several of the councils. Every place I went there was optimism, a high degree of optimism. The people in Marystown are experiencing optimism at this time because there is hope for our district because of the fact that people are coming back to work as a result of a new company moving in, and the White Rose deal effects on our particular area.

Mr. Speaker, we had a couple of meetings in that area. On Thursday night, the Member for Grand Bank and I attended a dinner in Marystown. We had, I think, over 100 people there from all parts of the Province. These people were coming up to us and they were congratulating us on the Voisey's Bay deal. We did not have one negative word spoken to us. We had people there from Placentia. They came up and they were delighted, as optimistic as they could possibly be, about this great deal that is about to happen in our Province, this great opportunity for the people of Placentia.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday we had an open meeting in Marystown, a public meeting with the Premier there. The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation attended. The Member for the Grand Bank District attended, and we had representatives there from all parts of the districts of Grand Bank, the District of Burin-Placentia West and the District of Bellevue. Everyone, with the exception of one person, came up and congratulated us on the deal, thought this was a great deal for our Province. We had one person who spoke against, and that was a gentleman from the District of Grand Bank, a person that everyone knows has expressed openly that he will be running for the PC nomination in the District of Grand Bank.

Mr. Speaker, since then I have had several phone calls at my office from people supporting the deal. I had two calls with people who were against the deal: one from the Grand Bank District and one from my own particular district, but all other people were entirely in favour of this deal and think it is a great thing for this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, one of the key elements of the Statement of Principles that I feel important is the inclusion on an Industrial and Employment Benefits Agreement with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. This agreement will provide local manufacturers, consultants, contractors and service companies in the Province with a full and fair opportunity to compete for the supply of goods and services for this project.

Mr. Speaker, Inco will detail plans acceptable to the government from monitoring and reporting on a regular basis on the efforts of both itself and its contractors in maximizing benefits for this Province. This agreement is good news for many areas of the Province, but especially for Argentia and the Labrador regions, regions that have experienced their own hardships in the past.

In my district, I am confident that the Marystown Shipyard, under the ownership of Kiewit, can play a role in the Voisey's Bay project. At our meeting on Friday afternoon Mr. Frank Smith, who is the Director of Business Development for PKS, was in attendance and he was very positive. He said that by the time the fabrication portion of the White Rose Project will have been completed, this will provide a very nice filler for work at the Marystown Shipyard, provided, of course, that we can compete and get the work there, but it certainly is another positive for our area. The experience of fabricating topsides for the White Rose Project and a very skilled workforce only makes Voisey's Bay related work more possible for our facility.

This agreement, Mr. Speaker, also provides that the proponent, Inco, will make full use of construction, fabrication and assembly capabilities in the Province so that benefits can be truly maximized for the people of our Province.

I want to take the opportunity to discuss certain elements of the Statement of Principles that have already previously be debated, but elements that are important enough to warrant repetition. In 1995 and again in 1998, the Liberal government of the day made amendments to the Mineral Act that raised the bar to demand processing to a finished product as a condition for future mining projects in the Province. We got criticism for it, Mr. Speaker, but we stood our ground, and Inco, to their credit, understood this non-negotiable position and has shown understanding and respect for it.

Since 1996, Mr. Speaker, our government has been working and negotiating to achieve this mandatory condition with respect to Voisey's Bay and I feel this Statement of Principles does just that. Many people have worked together to bring a project forward which is world-class by any standard, which will be implemented by a world-class company with a rich 100 year history and employ world-class citizens of this Province.

We had to strike a balance with Inco to make this project a reality. During previous negotiations we discussed the hydromet facility, but there was no commitment to an alternate plan for processing if the hydromet was not successful. We received a guaranteed commitment that processing will happen here even if the hydromet process is unsuccessful. Yes, Mr. Speaker, this agreement will see concentrate shipped out of the Province, but this will not happen until a demonstration hydromet processing facility is built in Argentia. Inco will have spent $850 million here by that time, before any of our resources go anywhere. And we have an iron-clad guarantee that Inco will replace all of the material that they ship out.

Mr. Speaker, this agreement was reached because we did not get ourselves caught up in a game of absolutes. We wanted to see the Innu and the Inuit, the people of Labrador, and the people of Argentia, as well as the entire Province, have hope that development would proceed. The sense of emotion in Argentia and Labrador, when this Statement of Principles was agreed, was well deserved because it was a long time coming. We had road blocks, but we have overcome them so that we have a stronger benefit with our Aboriginal people, that their commitment to economic prosperity for their region could be realized. Their time is now. This project provides them with opportunity to participate in a leading edge program development while preserving their own culture and the rights of their people.

Mr. Speaker, I am looking forward to the future of rural Newfoundland and Labrador with the economic spinoffs that will happen as a result of this project. The revenue to government for mining and mineral rights tax will be of benefit as we continue to work diligently to provide services to our people.

There was a concern about the equalization clawback from the federal government, but this project is a chance to show Canadians, who think that we are a place reliant on government handouts, that we can stand on our own two feet, more reliant on our own revenue resources and not on federal government equalization payments.

Mr. Speaker, if we were to accept the idea that developing new projects yield a reduction in equalization without acknowledging that there will be a corresponding increase in employment, business activity, tax revenues and gross domestic product, then we would never develop any project. In fact, what sort of benefits would that be for the people that we represent?

This Statement of Principles, Mr. Speaker, between the government and Inco is a good one for the people of the Province and will maximize benefits to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. A decision of this magnitude should not be based on hypothetical situations or what if scenarios but rather on sound economic and business practices that will ensure benefits for the people of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, we have carefully listened to the people of this Province and I feel that we have acted on their best interest with this Statement of Principles. By having a finished nickel product leave his Province we have met our commitment to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. The groundwork has been laid for development of importance in this Province and one that will be of great significance worldwide.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, we must realize that this Statement of Principles has given some hope back to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador because they will be the ones who will see the most benefits from this Voisey's Bay development. I am certainly proud, Mr. Speaker, to stand here today representing the historic District of Burin-Placentia West, and I certainly support this Statement of Principles.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS M. HODDER: I support it, Mr. Speaker, because I believe in the people who have negotiated this deal, our Premier, all of our negotiating team. I have a lot of confidence in these people and I have confidence in the way these negotiations have been handled, especially what has happened in our own caucus over the last number of weeks. About two weeks ago we met at the hon. Member for Bell Island's house out in Conception Harbour. At that meeting, Mr. Speaker, we were given an opportunity to make up our own minds about this deal. We were asked to look at the deal, to tear it apart from every aspect to ensure that we got a good deal for the people of this Province. We were told not to make a quick decision but to go out there and consult with lawyers, with people in the know, with people in the mining industry, with any persons that we felt confident would give us the answers that we needed, and we did that, Mr. Speaker.

I have great confidence in this deal and I certainly support it all the way, Mr. Speaker. I congratulate again everyone who was involved from the beginning and I look forward to the spinoffs and the benefits that my area and all areas of this Province will gain from this great deal.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Mercer): The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is a great honour and a great pleasure that I rise today to represent the people of the great District of Twillingate & Fogo, to take part in a debate that is very important to the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, and not just to the residents of my district.

For the past three days, Mr. Speaker, as you know and everyone in the Province knows, we have been standing here debating a deal on Voisey's Bay, a deal that has come about as a result of six years of negotiations between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and Inco.

Mr. Speaker, before I go any further I would like to thank the Premier for the role that he has played in this deal because it is not just a role that he has played in the past year as Premier of the Province, but he also played a role as the Minister of Mines and Energy for a year or two some years ago. He worked on that file at the time and he has worked on it since then.

I would also like to thank the Minister of Mines and Energy for the job that he has done and the team of civil servants that he put together who have devoted their lives to the civil service for the benefit of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I would also like to thank as well, Mr. Speaker, two groups of people who haven't received a lot of mention in the last few days, and those are the groups led by William Barbour of the Labrador Inuit Association, and Peter Penashue of the Innu Nation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Because, Mr. Speaker, they have done a tremendous amount of work on this deal and I wish them luck when they have their vote on Monday next.

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, I think this is a good deal for the Province and I believe that the vast majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians agree that it is a good deal for the Province. At least that is what we are hearing on the Open Line shows. That is what we read in the papers and that is what we seen in the recent poll conducted by The Telegram. It actually showed that 89 per cent of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador think it is a good deal and that we should get on with it, because, as I said, this deal has been negotiated over a period of six years but the ore at Voisey's Bay was discovered somewhat - a longer time than that.

It is almost ten years ago now since two gentlemen from this Province scratched the rocks on the north part of our Province and discovered the great nickel deposit that we now refer to as Voisey's Bay. It is not something that we came about lightly or a deal that we reached lightly. As I said, it took six years.

Like my colleague from Mount Pearl said yesterday afternoon: I am not a financial expert. I am not a lawyer and I am not a mining expert but, Mr. Speaker, I think that we put together a team of individuals who were experts in all of this. Mr. Speaker, I am not a mining expert, a lawyer, or a financial analyst, but I do believe that I am a rational thinking individual, not unlike all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and when you do not have the answers to all the questions, what do you do? You seek advice, and that is exactly what every member in this caucus has done over the past five to six years. It just did not happen last week, as the Opposition would have you believe, that this deal was somehow concocted in somebody's house out in Conception Bay South. This deal has been ongoing for practically six years.

We put together three teams. We put together the best legal advice we could find in this Province, not just the lawyers from the Department of Justice, even though I thank them for the work that they have done. We hired a very reputable law firm in this Province and they also worked on it. Mr. Speaker, not only did we do that but we ran this deal before other legal experts in this country, like Stikemen Elliott out of Ontario, who is one of the best legal firms in the country. What did they all say? They said that the deal is a good one, that we have the safeguards in the legal contract that we need, and that we will not be snookered or suckered. Like the Member from the Bay of Islands said earlier, it will stand the test if it ever comes to court. I believe they have done a good job.

I sort of felt embarrassed when I heard the member, or the Leader of the Opposition, when he came on last week and said: Any lawyer with a grain of salt could drive a Mack truck through this deal. That is a fine thing for the Leader of the Opposition to say - a fellow who want to become the Premier of this Province. He speaks loudly to the legal firms in this Province, and his colleagues.

I was very surprised, the day after the deal was announced down at the hotel, that a very reputable lawyer from Conception Bay North, Mr. Doug Moores - and I remember just two short years ago that he was being touted as the new Leader of the Opposition - and he came out Wednesday of last week and said this is a good deal, that this is a good deal for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and that we should sign that deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, besides the individuals who were involved in this deal with the Department of Finance, we also hired the best legal or the best financial advice we could find, and they told us that we had struck a good deal. I believe that we have. I truly and honestly believe that we have struck a good deal because, Mr. Speaker, you know, as well as I do, that The Globe and Mail has never been a friend of ours; never. In fact, most of the stuff that they say in that paper, that infamous paper, has always been to put us down in this Province. Not just on the nickel or anything else, it has been on the fishery, it has been on the seal hunt. Whenever they have gotten the opportunity to condemn us, they have done it. But, even The Globe and Mail had to come out last week with an editorial saying that the Province struck a good deal.

Mr. Speaker, we did have the best legal advice, we did have the best financial advice, and we also had the best mining advice. That is evident by the fact that the Association of Mining and Metallurgy came out and said afterwards that we have done a good deal here.

Mr. Speaker, in terms of mining, I also have some personal experience in that my father-in-law was a mining engineer, with a career of some fifty years in mining engineering. In fact, he worked in most of the mines in Northern Canada, and my wife was born in a mining town in Northern Canada, a town that no longer exists today. It was called Uranium City, Mr. Speaker. Not only did he work in the mines of Northern Canada, but for the last twenty years of his career, he spent it at Memorial University teaching mining engineering.

We have discussed this deal, and we have discussed all the aspects of what will happen in Voisey's Bay, and he told me, from all the experience that he has, that this is a good deal. He said: Gerry, what you have to remember is that Inco is a company that is 100 years old. It is one of the largest in the world, and when they make a commitment, it is to their best interest to honour that commitment. If you want to find out about what people think about Inco, go to Sudbury, a town that Inco created 100 years ago. Go to Sudbury and ask the people of Sudbury if they think that Inco are a bunch of crooks, which is how they are being portrayed, basically, by the Opposition for the last week in this Province, always talking about: What happens if they don't do this? What happens if they don't do something else? Or, they are going to weasel out of this part of the contract or they are going to weasel out of another part of the contract.

Just think out it. A company that has been in existence for 100 years, not only in this country but around the world, and we are talking about a company that is willing to come in here and, on top of the $4 billion they paid to get rights to that mine in Labrador, they are also going to spend $2.9 billion here in the next three to four to five years. What the Opposition would have you believe is that they are all a bunch of crooks. Just think about it.

I said to Dr. Stewart Gendron the other day: How do you feel that you are going to come into this Province and invest an additional $3 billion on top of the $4.-something billion that you invested already, and yet there are people in this Province who are looking at you and insinuating that you are all a bunch of crooks? Just think about that. Just think about the message that you are sending around the world to a group or company that wants to invest $3 billion and you are saying: Sorry, boys, we do not want your money because you are all a bunch of crooks.

Mr. Speaker, I also have a brother-in-law who is in the mining industry, who works out of Whitehorse, but he works mines around the world. In fact, just last year he was a supervisor in a mine in the mountains of Chile. Guess what technology they were using down there? Guess what technology they were using in their processing? Hydromet technology, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No!

MR. REID: That is what they were doing, in the mountains of Chile. That is what they were using. He tells me: No problem.

I understand that the rock formation and the ore is a different type in Chile than it is in Labrador, but, Mr. Speaker, Inco knows, and the mining industry knows, that Inco is 98 per cent sure that the hydrometallurgical facility in Argentia is going to work; 98 per cent sure.

My father-in-law, who is a mining engineer, my brother-in-law, who has been involved in mining all his life, both tell me this process will work. Inco will make it work because it is to their advantage to make it work. Why would Inco want to take concentrate from Voisey's Bay, ship it to Sudbury, and then ship it back to Newfoundland, or to Argentia, for final processing? The economics of it just does not make sense, if you stop to think about it. It would be far better and far more economical for them to take the concentrate from Voisey's Bay, ship it to Argentia, and then ship it around the world. Mr. Speaker, I honestly believe that the facility in Argentia will work.

Besides the experts I have mentioned already, a number of prominent individuals and groups around this Province came out immediately after the deal was announced and said that they support it. Now, I know what the political stipes of some of these people are and some I do not. The fact of the matter is, they are very prominent people and prominent groups in this Province, and I would like to read from some of them, some of the people who have stood in this Province and said, basically: We think this is a good deal. We think it is good for all residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, and we think that the government should sign this deal.

The Minister of Mines and Energy just passed me a huge page of people who have stood behind this deal, but I have my own and I will just read you some, Minister. Thank you very much.

The Association of Professional Engineers and Geologists say it is a good deal. The Newfoundland and Labrador Chamber of Mineral Resources say it is a good deal. Mr. Doug Moore, as I said earlier, a lawyer for some twenty, thirty years in the practice out in Conception Bay North, says it is a good deal. Mr. Harry Steele - I think every Newfoundlander and Labradorian knows who Harry Steele is - he is a self-made man who employs hundreds of people in this Province, a man for which most people in the Province have the utmost respect. He says he is for the deal. The St. John's Board of Trade says what? A good deal. Wade Locke, an economist with Memorial University: It is a good deal. Mayor Andy Wells, I don't know what his political stripe is. I don't know if anyone here knows what his political stripe is, and, believe me, he -

MR. NOEL: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: The Member for Virginia Waters says he does not know himself. Maybe he is right, but he has never been one who has come out and praised government, for sure. But, on this particular issue, he says it is a good deal not only for the people of Torngat Mountains, not only because it is good for the people of Argentia, but he feels as well it is good for the City of St. John's and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mayor Priscilla Boutcher, Corner Brook, what did she say? It is a good deal, let's get on with it. Mark Sexton, the Economic Development Corporation, Corner Brook, a good deal. Mr. Mark Sexton, I don't know the man myself but obviously some people out on the West Coast must know him and think that he is a good individual or he would not be on the Development Corporation in Corner Brook.

Another very important person in this Province, Mr. Speaker, Dr. Axel Meisen, the President of Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador, says it is a good deal for the Province. Another one, Mr. John Crosbie. Who is John Crosbie? He is a lawyer, has been a politician all of his life. He is the godfather of the Tory Party. That is what I consider him to be, what I have always considered him to be. He has sometimes been an opponent. We did not see eye to eye on the FPI talks we had earlier this year, but I do have the greatest respect for Mr. Crosbie because, if he thinks something is right, he stands for it. He did it on FPI. He is standing on this deal and he is saying that it is a good deal for the Province and he is not letting politics play a role in it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: The Mayor of Placentia supports the deal. The Opposition members opposite might say that is obvious; the reason she is supporting the deal is because it is good for her community. Well, it is good for her community but I think she also realizes that it is good for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Atlantic Economic Council, not always a friend of this Province and the government of this Province, what did they do? They came out to say it is a good deal for the Province. Down in St. Anthony, Mayor Ernest Simms comes out and says it is a good deal for the Province. The Mayor of St. Anthony says it is a good deal for the Province. The Chamber of Commerce in St. Anthony say it is a good deal.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that I only have a few minutes left. When I jotted down a few notes I didn't think I was going to be able to fill my twenty minutes.

Obviously, all of these people think it is a good deal; yet, the Opposition stand and all but one person over there say it is a terrible, rotten deal. Why is it a terrible, rotten deal? Well, the leader says it is a terrible, rotten deal because everyone who stood in support of it are doing it for their own personal reasons. He says that the unions and the construction firms in the Province obviously voted for it because they are getting something out of it. The legal people who came out and spoke in favour of it did not know what they were talking about because they were not held in such high esteem as he was.

Mr. Speaker, there were a few comments made in the last few days that I would like to address. The Member for The Straits & White Bay North, I heard him on the Open Line show the other night saying that, basically, all that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians were going to get out of this deal were a few construction jobs while it was being built. A few construction jobs in Labrador because he said there was no smelter going to be built in Argentia. What trash! I, for one, would never sign onto that deal unless I knew for certain that facility was going to be built in Argentia, and no one on this side would have done it. That is the reason, Mr. Speaker, that it took us six years to come to that deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: It is a terrible deal, he says, because there is nothing in it for the people of his district. He even went on to say that his neighbour in Gunners Cove - oh yes, he said, we had construction jobs before. His neighbour in Gunners Cove worked on the Bull Arm project. Where is he today? He said he is in Ontario working because he cannot get a job in this Province. He said there is nothing in it for his district but what does the Mayor of St. Anthony say? The mayor says: Most people cannot really comprehend, at this stage, the significance of the spinoff for this area. Do you know who I think he was talking about when he said most people? Do you know who was included in that most people who cannot realize at this stage? The member for the area.

What did the head of the Chamber of Commerce in St. Anthony say? What did he say? President Marshall Dean says: If the project is good for Labrador, it will also pay dividends for the Northern Peninsula and other areas of the Province. Obviously, the Member for The Straits & White Bay North is not paying much attention to the constituent and to the organizations in communities which he represents.

I had a conversation the other night with the Mayor of Englee, and he said: Gerry, excellent deal. He said: Get on with it. Sign it. It is not only good for Labrador and Argentia but it is also going to be good for this Peninsula.

I listened to the Member for St. Barbe yesterday in his speech here in the House and he said: If the processing facility was to be built in Port Saunders, the people in Port Saunders, they, too, would be jumping up and down in the streets for joy because they were going to be employed. Now, just think about that. Then, right after that, he said: But I will not be voting for the deal. If it was going to be built in Port Saunders, I would vote for the deal. The people would be jumping up and down in the streets but because it is being built in Argentia, I am not voting for the deal. Just think about that, Mr. Speaker. Just think about it! Here they are saying that it is good for one area of the Province but I am voting against it because it is no good for my constituents. Well, I am telling you, I represent the people of Fogo-Twillingate in the House of Assembly and I will tell you right now, I never heard that once in the past few days from any resident of Fogo Island, Twillingate Island, New World Island or Change Islands.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. REID: I never heard that selfish comment made by one of them, because it is no good for us we are not voting for it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. REID: On the contrary, Mr. Speaker. On the contrary!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The member's time is up.

MR. REID: I do not imagine, Mr. Speaker, they are going to give me leave.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: I just want to speak to the question raised by the Minister of Fisheries about leave. All of us agreed upon a set of rules before we got here and all of us have abided by them. I just want to make that point.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Understood.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East & Bell Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have been on a journey that began, for some of us, on Tuesday and will end some time later today. For others the journey started in 1994 when the discovery of Voisey's Bay took place. For others within the bureaucracy and the civil service, long standing, committed employees, the real journey started fifty-one weeks ago. Under the guidance of the Minister of Mines and Energy and direction from the Premier, they were sent to see if they could craft a deal that would be acceptable, not just to the people who sit on this side of the Legislature, but hopefully, to all members of the Legislature, but in more particular, for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. The journey will end this afternoon.

I do not intend to relive that journey. I do not intend to relive the proposal. The people of the Province, over the last forty-eight hours, have heard varying arguments from one side or the other. I will ask a question of all of us here in the Legislature and indeed, all of us here in the Province, where are we at this point? Where are we in terms of one argument being accepted and one argument being rejected? I will say to you that those who are in this Province that I would consider hard core Liberals will all come down on the side of this agreement. I will say to you that those who consider themselves hard core Tory, for their reasons, will come down against the agreement. Today, rather than try to speak to those I want to talk to, what I consider to be, the other 30 per cent, 35 per cent. I want to speak to those who have decided that this is a Province, Newfoundland and Labrador, that they want to live in, that they want to have their aspirations achieved. A Province where, like me with children on the mainland, would like to see them come back to this Province and participate in the growth of it, to be next door or up the road so that we can visit.

I had the privilege, some twenty-five years ago, of living in Placentia. I worked there at a manufacturing plant. I was their sales and marketing manager. One of the sad days of my life was when the parent company in the mainland said: It is over, we close up, we go home. I look at the community today and I see the mayor and so many others who have stayed in that community to carve out an existence for themselves, but also for their neighbours, people that I worked with twenty, twenty-five years ago. I remember us gathering at an assembly plant on the base in Argentia twenty-five years ago saying: We will come together and we hope it is in more prosperous times. Nothing pleased me more than to go back to Placentia this past week and share with them again, the potential of prosperity that will come their way.

I represent a mining community - well, it was a mining community - that has found a way to carve out a chance at tomorrow based on its history. We reopened the mines for tours. Fifteen thousand people went underground last year. That is the largest amount of people who have gone underground in that mine since the 1960s. I have talked to them. I have leaned on the fences. I have made the phone calls. I have moved through the community, and they said: Jim, lets get on with it. Because if we had at the end of the mining process, if we had at the end what came out of the mines on Bell Island, three miles out under the sea, if we had the opportunity for a finished product in this Province, perhaps Cambridge and Galt would not be Bell Island's largest communities today. It would not be. The thousands that come home every summer, and those who are now coming back have said to me: Perhaps we would still be here. I do not believe perhaps, I am convinced that they would.

Besides this being a project that will benefit so many regions of this Province, this is a project that also is a business deal. It is very tough to make a business deal that will on one side meet what we believe are the social needs of a Province, and that is what a Legislature such as ours does. It also meets the economic needs of the Province and also meets the needs of our social aspects in terms of generating the funds that will allow us to help other communities.

I have heard in the Legislature and I have heard on Open Line shows, comments such as: What will it mean to other regions of Newfoundland and Labrador? What will it mean to the Northern Peninsula? What will Corner Brook or Port aux Basques or other areas derive from this? To me it is very simple. The stronger that we can make each region of our Province, the less dependency they have on government and the more money that we can have to shore up those areas of our Province that have not seen the benefits today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: Marystown has been rekindled. It is another community that I believe we will see our families coming home to. Argentia and Placentia is the same way. I speak for the Bell Islanders and the other people from my district who have had to leave Newfoundland, but I also speak today for the people in the community of which I live, Conception Harbour. I speak for the Kennedys, the Daltons and the Costellos and the people who spend their summers living in the backs of their cars going from Manitoba to British Columbia and back to Ontario; up to Manitoba, down to Quebec, over to Saskatchewan. They spend six months of the year doing this. Today I speak for my neighbours who, hopefully, in the next five, ten years will not have to do that; and friends of mine like Dave Power, who will be able to stay and watch his children grow as opposed to saying good-bye in the spring, see you in the fall. I speak for my neighbours today, too.

I talked about it being a business deal. I have been in a lot of business deals in my lifetime; some good, some bad. My father said my nose should be a lot flatter because I have fallen a few times too, and it has not worked for me. Fortunately, in my life, some of the better deals came when I needed them most. What allowed me to be in a place like this today is because the people have said yes to me. I have hired lawyers - God knows, anybody who has been in business and spent their lives signing the front of the cheque rather than endorsing the back of the cheque, and anyone who has been in business understands what I am talking about when you say to your family: We don't buy groceries until Monday because we have to meet the payroll of the 300 people who are working for us.

At the peak performance of the companies that I was involved in, we had as many as 300 employees. I have hired the lawyers and I have hired the accountants. The accountants were the most generous. They were the ones who said to me: Jim, what would you like the numbers to be? Because, they could always be fudged one way or another. We can find flaws in numbers.

I have hired the lawyers who have given me their best guesstimates as to where I will be if I proceed with the project. I have relied in most cases, and as one lawyer who has been with me for twenty-five years, and my former partner for justice law, has said to me: I will gamble on your instincts even more than I will on my own training, because we have been right 80 per cent of the time.

Are there going to be flaws? I can assure you that some time in the next three, five, ten or fifteen years someone will be able to look at a part of the aspect of this agreement and say: Ha, ha. Look at that! They missed that! Hindsight is wonderful.

The hardest deal I have ever gone through is buying a building from Walter Noel. He is the only person - I will say it publicly - who got the better of me; the only guy who hung out because he saw the twinkle in my eye and I wanted a property that he owned. I actually paid full price. I never did it in my life.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: But, as I have heard today and I have heard on Open Line shows, look where we would be in Newfoundland and Labrador today if we had consulted a little more, if we had asked for more opinions; we would not have missed a thing called an escalator clause.

You know, I have studied that project and I have studied that deal because I always wondered how we missed that. In hindsight, the only decision I have come to in my life is that I will never, if I am wealthy enough, hire the Rothschild family, who actually were the bankers of kings and princes and presidents all over Europe. The Rothschilds were the people we hired to manage and watch what was good for us. They missed a thing called escalator simply because gold had been $35 an ounce forever and no one ever saw that kind of a change.

I had a chance to speak to one of the Rothschilds and I asked him, jokingly, how did you miss it? He said: It is not how we missed it; it is how we have regretted missing it to this day because, how much more would we have made? And, they would have.

There will be flaws. There will be something that will not be right, but while we are looking for the flaw and while we are trying to find what was not right, what we will see is the fact that we have now injected prosperity on the North Coast of Labrador.

There is a golf ball somewhere off a mountain in Nain that I drove about twenty years ago when I had my own advertising company. The Newfoundland Telephone Company were doing something unique; they were building towers on mountains in the middle of nowhere. We did a movie for them to depict that. I flew in, watching the helicopters carry the equipment to the top of the mountains. Somewhere up there - the Minister of Environment should not listen to this - there is a golf ball belonging to me because I couldn't resist driving one that day. I will tell you, the same slice I had then, I have now.

I remember Nain. I will never look in the mirror and say to myself - because the guy I look at every morning is the one I have to have the most confidence in. I have gone through a lot of upheavals in my life, in this Legislature and outside. My high school yearbook says: ambition, politics, and my mother used to tell us an old story: Be careful what you wish for. Do you know something? The only thing I wished for in life is the one thing that has given me the most heartaches in life. It has. The people have said yes to me and I am here.

The point I am trying to make is: I have not, to date, in studying this proposal, had a problem with looking in the mirror and saying: Jim, perhaps we should not give prosperity to the North Coast of Labrador. Perhaps we should not say to the people of Argentia and Placentia, that you huddled with twenty-five years ago and said: I would like to be back some day, to do something for this community.

Well, I am not the one who is doing it. There is a company called Inco and a government who has agreed that they are willing to gamble, take a chance, have a vision, move forward and give those people an opportunity to share the same benefits and wealth that we share every day because we live in a capital region.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: Where do we end up when the process is finished? There is no prediction in this. We know it is going to happen. This afternoon there will be a vote take place; the majority will rule. That is our system. Our system says, the majority will rule.

The majority that rules today, and votes on this particular aspect and says yes, are the same people that enough of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador said should sit here. We will have to go back at some point in time and face them, and knock on their doors and say: I am here again.

I can, in all conscience, with all conviction, knock on my doors and say: I am here. I believe I have served you well. Have I or haven't I? If they say to me at that ballot box or in that election: Jim, you have not, my response will be to them: You have spoken. It is your decision and I accept it. I will offer my congratulations to whomever it is comes behind me, and I will offer my help.

I owe no allegiance to anyone who sits to my right on this issue. I owe no allegiance to anyone who sits opposite me on this issue, and I challenge any member who is here today, on this side or that side, who had dealings with me in private matters concerning their constituents - I don't know politics when we are talking about constituents. I know politics in here when we are bantering at each other, but not when I am dealing with constituents because they have said yes to you and you deserve that courtesy from me whether you are sitting to my right or in front of me on this issue -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: - which is so important to me and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. I am the one who shaves every morning, and I am the one who looks at the guy looking back at me. I will tell you, I have torn this deal apart. I have torn it apart looking for the flaws, and I have heard some of them. I have heard them there and I have heard them in our caucus meetings. It is not perfect.

I joke with Barbara, my wife, and tell her that the chariot will come one more time. If will come when she is getting ready for her last breath. The chariot is coming to pick her up, because anyone who has lived with a politician - I think my colleagues will understand what our spouses go through. When I make these decisions, whether it is 1 o'clock or 2 o'clock in the morning - and those of us who are married will understand this - when we hold the best conversations about our children and their needs, our own problems and concerns, we tend to consult with our spouse, our partner in life, and make decisions, and we have talked about this. I have said to her, as I have said to my father, on this issue I have no problem looking in the mirror in the morning and looking at the person who is looking back at me and saying: Job well done. A perfect job? No. Life is not perfect. Marriage is not perfect. Our children are not perfect, except to us. We want them to be. In our eyes they are, with all of their warts, with all of their pimples, and all of the little things they are going to do.

Life is not perfect; this deal is not perfect. As I said, I have no qualms, I have no question, I have no concern about injecting some prosperity on the North Coast of Labrador, and I have no problem with saying to the people of Conception Bay East and Bell Island, and indeed my neighbors in Conception Harbour, that this is a deal that I believe will allow you and your families to prosper and to share in the wealth with those of us in this capital region.

You know, there is a thing known as east of the overpass and west of the overpass. Most of us who are in this Legislature need to spend more time west of the overpass. I grew up and was raised in Corner Brook, lived in Stephenville, spent time in Placentia, worked in Glenwood, and I know all these areas. I tell you this: The real world is out there, and the more we can do for the people west of the overpass, the more we do for everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: In closing, Madam Speaker, let me simply say: Perfect deal? No. Acceptable deal? Better than acceptable. A deal that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador can say yes to? Not all of them are going to.

I will end with my opening remarks. The 30 per cent who are neither hard core Liberal, hard core PC, or hard core NDP, that is who I am talking to, the ones who are not going to carry our banner and wave it high. I believe they are the ones I have had a chance to speak to in my district as well. I believe they are the ones who are saying to me: Take the chance - not a gamble. Go forward and make this happen for each and every one of us. Make it happen for our neighbours, make it happen for our children, and make it happen for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Vote with your conscience, vote freely, but if you can, say yes. Tonight I will have no problem saying yes.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER (Ms M Hodder): Before we recess, yesterday the hon. the Opposition House Leader raised a point of privilege in the House concerning comments made by the hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace. The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace was not recognized at the time. The comments were barely audible and they were not transcribed. The Chair listened to the tape recording and was able to discern some comments on the part of the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace. In the opinion of the Chair, however, they do not point to a prima facie case of breach of privilege. Also, the hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace stood and withdrew his comments. In the opinion of the Chair, that matter has been resolved.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, to relieve any anxiety or any doubt, I will say right from the top that I am supporting this deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I do so gladly, enthusiastically, and without any pangs of remorse, Madam Speaker. I would say to the Leader of the Opposition, I am not nauseous and I am in great shape. As a matter of fact, I am in great shape; maybe a little bit overweight, but apart from that in great shape in every way, shape and form. I made this decision, Madam Speaker, in the best of health. I make this decision in the best of health and making it on behalf of my constituents in the District of Terra Nova -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: - in one of those bays that the Leader of the Opposition alluded to last evening when he talked about this being not only about Voisey's Bay, but it is about Placentia Bay, Bonavista Bay, et cetera. Well, I have been a representative of that great bay of Bonavista Bay every since I have been a member of this House. I speak on behalf of a large section of that bay, including my own District of Terra Nova for which I am very grateful for having given me the opportunity to serve, but also for the great constituents of the great electorate - the electors of Bonavista North, the place that I have served for a number of years.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: And know that they, too, would want me to support this deal.

Madam Speaker, I represent an area where people follow work throughout the year, wherever. They do not have the good fortune of working at home, for years and years, with the decrease in forestry activity. I grew up in Gambo which was the forest industry: logging, sawmills. Since that ceased to be a real industry in that area, in the 1960s, people followed jobs throughout Canada, construction jobs throughout Newfoundland. Wherever there is construction in Canada, people from the Terra Nova District, from Bonavista North, are there. It is a routine.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I am so glad that they now have the opportunity to find employment in Voisey's Bay, to find it in Argentia and wherever the multiplying and mushrooming factor will result from this great job, that people in Terra Nova, in the District of Terra Nova and in Bonavista North will be following those jobs. They would be disappointed if I didn't stand up here today and vote for this great project on their behalf, and I am doing that, Madam Speaker, I am doing that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Madam Speaker, I am not going to use any weasel words to say that I support Voisey's Bay but I don't support these Statement of Principles, because these Statement of Principles, that is the project! That's Voisey's Bay! That's it!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: If you do not support the Statement of Principles, you cannot support the project. That is the only project that I know about. The only project taking place in Voisey's Bay is that which will be (inaudible) as a result of these Statement of Principles. That is the only one I know of and that is what I am voting for today because that is the only choice that I have. That is the only choice that I have to help create employment in this Province, to help expand this Province economically and financially. That is my choice today and, Madam Speaker, I have studied the Statement of Principles and I want to congratulate the Premier for his great vision, for his commitment, and for his dedication to this project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I want to commend the Minister of Mines and Energy and his team for the great work that they have done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Further, I want to commend the Premier for the way that he allowed his caucus, his Cabinet, to participate in the dialogue all the way through this debate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Despite what Opposition members said, we were informed all along the way and we were a part and parcel of the whole process. That is why we are here today so united behind the Premier and united behind this project.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Madam Speaker, I said that I am not nauseous doing this in a sound mind. Somebody said to me a couple of days ago: They are getting concerned about the Leader of the Opposition, because whenever they hear him -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. LUSH: Last week, he was angry. He was awfully angry and now he is nauseous. They said: Maybe he should stop under great stress. Maybe he should stop getting angry because that causes a lot of stress on the body; this getting angry. Madam Speaker, there cannot be anything worse on the body than being negative. Being negative the whole time, negativity, scepticism, cynicism, that has to be hard on the body.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Madam Speaker, can't you see the difference over here? Where there is no cynicism, where there is confidence, where there is hope. You see different people smiling and laughing Quite a difference!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Our doctor's bills are not very expensive because we are an optimistic people as opposed to being a pessimistic people. We are people with hope and confidence as opposed to people being negative. That is why we are supporting this project. That is why we are supporting this deal. That is why we are supporting the Statement of Principles.

I wanted to make another comment because it is difficult knowing where to go after you have been seated here listening to all the comments. I have been listening to the comments very attentively, but naturally, the ones that really got to me were the ones advanced by the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition -

AN HON. MEMBER: Don't be negative now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I am not being negative.

The Leader of the Opposition in his attempt to reduce government to a simplistic operation can solve things so quickly. He talked about the House of Assembly, how we were rushing this piece of business through the House. Can you imagine talking about rushing Voisey's Bay when it has been in the public domain for the last five or six years? The hon. the Member for Placentia talked about how they almost had a deal and how the expectations were raised to the people in his area; one of the most debated issues ever on the provincial scene.

In the last session of the House it took up a major portion, both in the general debating and in Question Period. Then people started talking about this process - three days - and I said how three days of debating equates into three to four weeks of debating under normal procedure. The Leader of the Opposition said: But, Question Period is not there. Well, I tell the Leader of the Opposition, if we were debating under routine he would not be allowed to ask questions on Voisey's Bay if we were debating it. You could not be asking questions on Voisey's Bay if we were debating it because the House clearly states that when a matter is being debated you cannot ask questions in the House of Assembly because, you see, questions is not a period for debate. You have a place to debate it. That is why we have made this provision. We have made the provision that he can ask questions, so he is getting it both ways in this system. He has been allowed to ask questions which he would not be able to do under the normal circumstance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: I think the best one where he reduced government to a simplistic operation, the best one that I have heard in a long time, and I do not know where else you would get this simplistic reduction of how government operates. He talked about equalization and that he would not have completed this deal until we had the inequities ironed out in equalization. Madam Speaker, what a way to go. If we had waited for that where would Hibernia be? Where would the offshore oil be if we had waited until we ironed out the problems related to equalization? But, he was going to solve it very quickly! I want the people of the Province to listen. I have been working on this equalization situation with the Premier for the last year-and-a-half and I know how difficult it is and I know the great job that he has done. I know how he has been advancing it on the national scene to get this equalization formula (inaudible) so that we get our just dues; get what is due us in the Constitution.

Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition had a solution. I thought he was going to take Mr. Hand and go right into the Prime Minister's office and sit down and say: Solve this, Sir! Solve this right away or there will be no development of Voisey's Bay. Now what a simplistic solution. Well, he should call his colleagues, he should call Premier Hamm and tell him how simple this is. He should call Premier Binns and tell him how simple it is. He should call Premier Lord. All three, in conjunction with the Premier, have been working on this for the last year-and-a-half to get the federal government convinced that they ought to change the equalization formula. But, our Leader of the Opposition here in Newfoundland, he has it fixed,. He has the formula. Just get on the plane, take Mr. Hand, drag him along with you, go into the Prime Minister's office and say: Mr. Prime Minister, you have to fix this equalization. You have to fix it because I have Mr. Hand here with me and we are doing Voisey's Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: Well, what a brilliant solution. Complexity and sophistication reduced to simplicity in indescribable words.

Now, he finished up, Madam Speaker, last night by making a plea. He said he did not want to say that he was not voting for the proposal. He did not know how he could get out of that. He does not like the agreement but he has been set against this proposal or the agreement, he has been set against this from day one. I have often wondered what kind of an agreement we would have for the Leader of the Opposition to support it. But to try and ameliorate the whole situation, to try and soften it: we are not against the proposal. We are here to help. We are here to help the government. Take our help. I have such a store of legal advice and my caucus has such knowledge. I am here to help. I have been waiting. The Opposition, he says, it is their job. The job of the Opposition - I have been there long enough, I ought to know. The job of the Opposition is to oppose and to criticize responsibly; do not forget responsibly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: They are to offer alternatives. Now, they have been very strong on the first two points, to criticize and oppose. They have been very strong on that but on the alternatives I have not seen anything, I have been waiting. When the Opposition House Leader got up, right on the end of that, he said: We are here. We are here to help. We are here to help and he finished. So, when the Opposition House Leader got up I figured he would carry on, he would continue and he would come with the help. I thought he would come with the help but oh, I was so saddened.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: If I were not in such good health I would have become nauseous.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: He thought he had found the Achilles heel whereby this would be derailed. He thought he had found the Achilles heel. Guess what it was? The mandate. We did not have the mandate. Now, he went on through. I can understand - and nobody had talked about it he said. Well, I am going to talk about it now.

He went on talking about this mandate. I can appreciate that the hon. Opposition House Leader would know this more than anybody else, he would know the circumstances surrounding that. But, Madam Speaker, in 1995 to ensure that this Province got its maximum benefits from mining we brought in legislation that raised the bar. We brought in legislation that said: up to this point in time no more mining would take place without it was processed. It had to be processed to a final product, to a finished product. That is the law, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: In the election of 1996 we took that as part of our mandate. I will tell hon. members what the mandate was. In 1996, the election, fulfilling the law, meeting the public goal. "The new Liberal government will take every step necessary by government to develop and gain full benefits from the Voisey's Bay mine, including the construction of a smelter and other ore processing facilities in our Province." That is what we said.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: That is the Red Book, that is what the Red Book said: full processing.

Now in 1999, which is the one they refer to all the time, when we talked about full and fair benefits from our Province, which included Voisey's Bay, Labrador hydro and petroleum, our first commitment was, our first item in the platform book of 1999 was, "The Liberal government with a new mandate will ensure that our province receives full and fair benefits from development of its resources, especially the nickel at Voisey's Bay...".

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LUSH: That is the mandate. We have it in law, that our natural resources have to be finished to a final product. We have two commitments, in an election in 1996 and in an election in 1999.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. LUSH: The Opposition House Leader likes to refer to the - not a spoonful. Well, I can see how they would sort of take that little bit of hyperbole, take that little bit of hyperbole and hang on to it. Haven't hon. members read about that in their English classes, that, to make a point sometimes, to make a point emphatically and strongly and convincingly, that you use a little bit of hyperbole?

Now, the Opposition Leader, I can see how he can believe that hyperbole, because last night, and again in talking about the Statement of Principles, he mentioned that somehow this could not be changed because we would have to change the size of the volume or something. He said there were eighteen statements here and the Premier said there would be no deletions or additions. It is an eighteen page document and he thought - he could not see how we could come up with a document that would stay within that eighteen pages.

The Premier said there would be no deletions, no additions, and there cannot be; because, if we are going to stick to that, it has to stay the same number of pages as the Statement of Principles.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time is up.

MR. LUSH: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: I thank everyone for their participation and their interest.

This House now stands recessed until 2:30 p.m.

 

 


 

The House resumed at 2:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before I call the Question Period, I would like to welcome to the gallery today, Mr. George Saunders, the Commissioner for the Petroleum Products Pricing Commission; Mr. David Toms, Research Director with the PPPC; as well as the Honourable Earl Anzai, Attorney General of the State of Hawaii.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: As well, I would like to welcome to the gallery some former Members of the House of Assembly: Mr. Art Reid, Mr. Melvin Penney, Mr. Bill Hogan, Ms Patt Cowan, Mr. Graham Flight, Dr. Hubert Kitchen, and Dr. Rex Gibbons.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: As well, I would like to acknowledge and welcome to the gallery, the Mayor of St. John's, Mr. Andy Wells.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there are several very important agreements related to this project which have not or will not be made available to the members of the Legislature and indeed to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. In clause 34 of the Statement of Principles, government acknowledges that it will enter into interim measures agreements and other alternative agreements with both Aboriginal groups that will include the Voisey's Bay chapter of the respective Lands Claims Agreements.

On April 25, 2002, the Premier made a commitment to table all Agreements in Principle and all final agreements with the Innu Nation and the Labrador Inuit Association and bring them to the House of Assembly for ratification.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Premier: Why has he agreed to table all these Aboriginal Agreements in Principles and all final agreements in the House for ratification, but is not prepared to place all or any of the final documentation for Voisey's Bay under the same scrutiny in this House of Assembly?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the question, and maybe I missed something in it. The same level of scrutiny will be available for every document. The Aboriginal communities and the Aboriginal people of Labrador, as all members of the Legislature, understand, with their Benefits Agreements which have been negotiated between them and the company, they are having a vote through their own democratic processes on Monday of next week. I am sure everybody here hopes that the vote is a positive one, because they want to proceed.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the Voisey's Bay chapter of the land claims and so on, all of those things will be tabled here when they are completed and agreed to - not debated, but tabled here for information. That is the same commitment I have given to every other part and every other agreement associated with the development of Voisey's Bay, that when the final, legal translation is finished, from now to September 30, we will make available and table - not for debate, but for information - for anyone who wants to see them, everything that is associated with this particular deal, because we want everybody to know all the information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there appears to be a double standard with regard to the Aboriginal agreements and, of course, the major agreements which are being placed before this House of Assembly and which we are asked to vote on, of course, which the Opposition has not seen in any form.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the other agreements that have not been provided to this Legislature and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, we are also being asked to sign off on the Industrial and Employment Benefits Agreement which we have not seen as well.

According to clause 27 of the Statement of Principles, the final agreement should provide for employment of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and should provide a full and fair opportunity for contractors, consultants and service companies to compete.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Premier that, due to the many unanswered questions that are posed in clause 27 of the Statement of Principles, is the Premier satisfied that the safeguards have been put in place to ensure that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will be employed in the project and that contractors will have a full and fair opportunity to compete?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker, absolutely.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, although the Industrial and Employment Benefits Agreement has not been finalized, and will not be finalized until late September, this government is allowing Inco to move forward and award millions of dollars in contracts without that final documentation.

Despite the fact that we do not have a final agreement on project development or benefits, the decision to man the torpedoes and move forward is being taken to allow Inco to fast track its operations.

Mr. Speaker, can the Premier please tell the people of this Province if he feels it is prudent to allow Inco to commence work without having completed the Industrial and Employment Benefits Agreement and other agreements?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, despite the rhetoric of the Leader of the Opposition in trying to describe it in a certain manner, we are moving forward very prudently, as we have done in the full fifty-one weeks of the last negotiation to get to this point. We did not rush into it. We did not try to do it in a day or two. It took six years, all totalled, Mr. Speaker, fifty-one weeks of intensive negotiation in this last one attempt alone, out of three different attempts.

In Labrador, for the work that will proceed, hopefully beginning in three or four weeks' time, the middle of July, depending on ice conditions, there are guarantees already for business opportunities with the Aboriginal communities as part of their Benefits Agreements, in which they have their partners already selected and they will be reaping great benefits with Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who happen to also be Aboriginal, but Newfoundlanders and Labradorians reaping great benefits and other Labradorians reaping great benefits starting in about three weeks. No rush for Inco, but a great opportunity for our people to move ahead.

Mr .Speaker, the same thing will happen when contracts are let to Newfoundland and Labrador-based companies for work in Argentia, at the site, and also when contracts are let here in St. John's for work at the Inco Innovation Centre. Newfoundland and Labrador-based companies; just check the news. I will probably be trying to get in the news by going to the announcements, cutting some ribbons, sitting on tractors, wearing a helmet. I guess I will get criticized for that, Mr. Speaker, because they will suggest I should not do that. We should not acknowledge good things happening. I will try to keep it down so I don't offend the Opposition, but Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will benefit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Believe me, Premier, this is not simply rhetoric. These questions are very, very important to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and I am very, very interested to hear you say that contracts and benefits and employment will be for the benefit of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. The ratification vote hasn't even occurred yet and already there are problems with this Statement of Principles, and we have already pointed that out.

Last night, we were contacted by representatives from CA Crosbie Shipping Limited. This is the company that provided marine transportation services to and from Voisey's Bay during the exploration phase. It is a Newfoundland company with ships from Newfoundland ports, and crews comprised of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Yet, this company was not provided with a fair opportunity to bid on this transportation work for Voisey's Bay. The work is, instead, being awarded to a Quebec company called Gagnier Transport. Can the Premier please explain why there are not appropriate safeguards in place to protect provincial companies that hire Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and carries on business in Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We will have many of these opportunities over the next thirty, forty, fifty years to have discussions about which companies are getting the work.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe what the Leader of the Opposition and the members opposite would like to understand is this, that the shipping contract that he talks about is one of the business opportunities that is being organized and orchestrated in a partnership with the Aboriginal communities. They themselves - we do not tell the Innu Nation who to partner with. We do not tell - and will never tell because we respect them too much - the Labrador Inuit Association who to partner with.

Everybody has known that this has been about to happen for about five or six years. Every Newfoundland and Labrador based company had opportunities to forge joint ventures and partnerships with the Innu Nation and the Labrador Inuit Association. If a company from Quebec has forged a partnership that the Innu of Labrador or the Inuit of Labrador are satisfied with, it is not going to be me. To use a phrase from the Leader of the Opposition last night, Mr. Speaker, it will not be on my watch that I will try to go in and suggest that I know better than Mr. Penashue or Mr. Barbour what is good and right and proper for their people when they have the right to make the decision.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So there are, in fact, no safeguards or guarantees for the people of our Province for work or contracts. Isn't that correct?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, my next question is for the Minister of Mines and Energy. I ask the Minister of Mines and Energy: Will he confirm for this House that on April 8, 2002, the chief negotiator for the Province, or one of the main negotiators for the Province, Mr. Brian Maynard, the Deputy Minister, had discussions with CA Crosbie Shipping about their concern about the exclusion of provincial companies in the process? At the same time, will he also confirm that he had a meeting on April 22, 2002 with the same company who expressed those same concerns to the minister who was also the negotiator on the Voisey's Bay deal? They were concerned that they were not going to be taken into consideration in letting of those projects, letting of that contract in Labrador, and they had been told that a Quebec company was already in the driver's seat and were going to get that contract. That was in April, 2002, minister!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Maybe the Leader of the Opposition, if he had done all of his homework, would have understood that the Premier also had a discussion with that company.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you. Oh, that was your next question. Oh, very good. Thank you. I am glad I anticipated your question.

Mr. Speaker, let me repeat the answer again for greater clarity and certainty. If the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that the Aboriginal peoples of Labrador, who own the land - maybe he disputes that too, but that is the law. He understands the law. They own the land, Mr. Speaker. They are about to give up rights to the part of the land, only the part of the land on which the Voisey's Bay deposit is located for the period of time that the mine is in operation because we have not completed a land claim arrangement yet.

The company is also negotiating and, hopefully, finalizing on Monday, benefit agreements with them which allow for business opportunities primarily for the Aboriginal peoples of Labrador. They have chosen their partners and we are not about to tell them - not me, not the minister, not our chief negotiator, not anybody - who the Labrador Inuit Association or whom the Innu Nation of Labrador choose to deal with. That is their choice. We respect their rights. They are going to do everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador a big favour by setting aside the land on which the Voisey's Bay deposit is situated so that this project can proceed for their benefit, for the benefit of the people of Labrador, and for the benefit of the people of the Province. We will not interfere with that in any way, shape or form.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, my point, precisely. This is not only about Aboriginal rights. This is the right of every Newfoundlander and Labradorian to jobs on this project which you promised, Premier. You promised throughout this process that they would have jobs. That is what this sham process is all about. That is why we are so concerned about this document and that is why, Premier, we offered to help you make this a better deal and you refused.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, would the Premier not agree that already, before the Statement of Principles is even ratified in this House of Assembly, there are insufficient guarantees or safeguards that the work and jobs will go to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians? Now, not only are jobs going to Ontarians and Manitobans, they are now going out to Quebecers as well. Shame on you!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will gladly, Mr. Speaker, let history record who the shame is on in this circumstance. Absolutely and gladly let history record it!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, what we acknowledge on this side of the House, and I think what most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in Labrador and throughout the Island understand, is this one fundamental, one very big fundamental. Listen closely, because obviously you may be one of the ones who don't understand it. If the Aboriginal peoples of Labrador do not ratify their benefit agreements on Monday, regardless of anything else and everything else that anyone else might want to do, nothing occurs. It is their land. The absolute sanction as to whether or not this proceeds in Newfoundland and Labrador is not mine, it is not this government's sanction, it is not the Opposition, it is not the rest of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is the Aboriginals who outright own it, Mr. Speaker.

We have negotiated with them in good faith. We respect them. We would not go to them and say: You have to listen to me about which Newfoundland and Labrador based company you choose, because guess what we are going to do with land claims. As well, Mr. Speaker, we are also going to provide for self-governance, because we believe they are educated enough, they are bright enough, they are intelligent enough, and they are self-reliant enough to do their own things, to make their own decisions.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, we will respect that every single time because this is, first and foremost, an opportunity for the people who are giving up the rights to their land, to stand on their two feel and become self-reliant just like the rest of us want to do in the Canadian Federation. Mr. Speaker, it is their turn first. They will make their own decisions.

I am glad to see the Leader of the Opposition now say that he would also, if he was ever Leader of this Province -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: - tell the Aboriginals what to do because he knows best.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a couple of questions for the hon. Minister of Mines and Energy. It relates to an issue that I was hoping he would have brought out last night in debate. It is concerning section 35, namely on electrical rates and provision of power.

Minister, section 35 in the Statement of Principles commits the government to provide power for a commercial hydromet plant or a nickel matte refinery on the Island. Estimates range from a low of 50 megawatts. A spokesman for Hydro said in a radio interview a month ago, that Hydro would have to find some other source even for 50 megawatts. In 1998, the former Premier said: We have reached the point where new power requirements increasingly have to be met by burning oil and, quite frankly, oil is very expensive.

I ask the minister: Will the minister tell us how much power Inco will need on the Island and where will it come from?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We at Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, as the hon. member would know, have a forward looking planning division to anticipate the power needs for the Province, for Labrador and the Island portion of the Province, for a rolling period of about ten years in advance. They tell me, as recently as in the last week or two, that we have sufficient power, or power potential, within the Province to meet the current forecast needs including the anticipated 40 to 60 megawatts of power that we expect will be required by Inco when the new processing plant is commissioned and ready to go into operation.

We have a number of alternatives that we can continue to choose from for the development of additional power. We have Granite Lake which is now being done, we have Island Pond which is coming behind that, and we have the potential, of course, in the Province, in addition to the enormous potential in wind power which we are now piloting in the Province, we have enormous potential in some other small hydro electric projects in the Province. So, there is no anticipated deficiency in power supply in the Province, and we fully are able, by our judgement and projections, to meet the needs of this fine new industry which we will be happy -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to take his seat.

MR. MANNING: - to have as a customer to go on the grid in this Province to serve the economic and social needs of our people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, to get even 50 megawatts of electricity from thermal generation, Hydro would have to increase production from the Holyrood plant by some 15 per cent and burn 15 per cent more oil. Hydro says thermal generation is not cost-effective. Yet, under the terms of the Statement of Principles, Mr. Speaker, Inco will get the lowest industrial rate in the Province, which is about one-half the rate that Hydro's residential customers pay.

My question is: How much will Hydro's residential customers have to pay to subsidize the energy that will have to be supplied and provided to Inco?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to help the hon. member with some information by letting him know that there is no such thing as a low, lower or lowest industrial rate in this Province. There is one industrial power structure rate in the Province that applies to our major industrial customers. They are the following: North Atlantic Refinery, the Kruger mill in Corner Brook and the two Abitibi mills. We have committed to this project, as a large, fifth industrial customer in this Province, no more or no less in terms of favourable rates for electricity. They will get the same rate as everybody else in like circumstance in heavy industry in this Province will get. There is a rate for industrial customers in this Province that is of long standing. There is a rate for domestic customers in this Province as well and we will treat this new, long awaited and much invited new customer to our grid on the same basis as we would treat another paper mill or another oil refinery or the like.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the Minister of Finance.

On May 20, 1999, the mines minister who is now the Premier of the Province said, and I quote. "For about the 250th time, in this Legislature and outside, we will give the same answer. Everybody in Newfoundland and Labrador and everybody associated with the Voisey's Bay project, including Voisey's Bay Nickel company and Inco, understands that there will be no tax holiday with respect to the Voisey's Bay project. That has been very clear from the moment when Voisey's Bay deposit was discovered. Everybody knows that."

I want to ask the minister: Why are they proposing, in article 46 of the Statement of Principles, that over a ten-year period Inco will get a $20 million tax break on taxes?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think the answer can be best explained as looking at the glass half full or half empty. Let me try to explain it this way, Mr. Speaker. We have actually reduced the holiday. We have limited the holiday. We have induced more burden on Inco than was previously there. We have limited the tax holiday to ten years, capped it at $2 million a year for $20 million. As a result of that, we will achieve over $90 million more to our Treasury. I see that as half full, not half empty, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Premier Grimes said that the Ministry of Finance has done estimates or developed figures that show over $1 billion will flow in over the life of this project. The question is not what flows in, you subtract what flows out and what the Province nets.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: The Voisey's Bay Environmental Impact Panel, using a revenue model developed by economists engaged by Voisey's Bay Nickel Company, have forecast that 78 per cent of all tax revenues flowing to the project through mining taxes, through corporate taxes, through income taxes and sales taxes, will flow to the federal government under equalization adjustments. Now, Voisey's Bay Nickel Company forecasts that the Province will retain net revenues of $417 million over the life of this project and the federal government will get $4.9 billion over the course of this project.

Mr. Speaker, when you look at the revenues that must be deducted from that, the $20 million tax break to be deducted from that, I say, Mr. Speaker, it leaves our Province. With the 5 per cent deducted that the Premier commited in January -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his answer.

MR. SULLIVAN: - he indicated to the LIA and possibly to the Innu - that leaves $369 million over thirty years to our Province. That is an average of $12 million a year.

My question, Mr. Speaker: Does the minister feel that a net average of $12 million a year is a fair return to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for such a mega project as Voisey's Bay?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On this side of the House, this government feels that 76,000 jobs over the life of the agreement is a very good deal. I want to say to the member opposite, we all know this. If we are to wait until the equalization changes are made before we proceed - like I said last night and many of my colleagues - would we have done Hibernia? Would we have done White Rose? Would we get out of bed in the morning, I ask? No, we would not.

Mr. Speaker, we have made a decision. This is about jobs. It is about economic growth. It is about getting off equalization. It is about hope, it is about reality, and it is about guarantees. That is what this is about, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Premier. In December of 1995, the government announced that it was introducing a tax - in the words of the minister of the day - to ensure that the Province receive its fair share of our non-renewable resource wealth, the mineral and tax act is being amended to impose a non-renewable resource development tax in addition to the existing mining tax.

I want to ask the Premier: Why did he abandon that tax in negotiations with Voisey's Bay Nickel and Inco over this project? Why is there no non-renewable resource development tax to ensure that the people of this Province get a fair return for its non-renewable resource that is going to be going out the door?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What we chose to do in the best interest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians was to put in a single generic tax regime for mining operations that would place Newfoundland and Labrador in a globally competitive position. The phrase that the economists use, Mr Speaker, is, in the middle of the pack.

There are many jurisdictions in which mining operations occur where they charge a greater tax than we do. There are many jurisdictions where they charge a lesser tax than we do. We are positioned, as the economists say, right in the middle of the pack. It makes us globally competitive. It makes sure that any company that comes here, that wants to exploit and use and develop for the benefit of Newfoundlanders Labradorians a mining resource, that they will know the tax regime before they start. They will know that it is not onerous. That will know that it is not lenient. They will know that it is fair.

Rather than have any separate taxes on top of that, we have settled now on the regime that will be introduced and debated, and I look forward to the hon. member's views on it when we debate the new tax regime for mining operations in Newfoundland and Labrador because that is a piece of legislation that will not only apply to Voisey's Bay but every future mining operation in Newfoundland and Labrador from now on.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The government obviously gave that up.

Inco knew what they were getting into, Mr. Speaker. In fact, they gave the estimates in 1998 based on then existing tax regime that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador - before equalization, I do not want to hear about that - would get $1.5 billion in revenue provincially, own source revenue, from the Labrador portion of the deal alone. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister, last night, finally told us that she expects that the provincial revenue will be $1.1 billion over the life of the project and that includes the Labrador portion and the processing portion in Argentia.

I want to know, Mr. Speaker, what else did the Premier give up in negotiating with Inco to lose $400 million, not counting the benefits that would flow from the Argentia processing plant? What else did they give up in order to get down to that low number that we just heard the previous questioner ask about?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me make a correction, in case the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi labours under a misconception into the future. I would like to clear it up for him.

The mining tax that will be introduced into this Legislature in the fall was not part of the negotiation with Inco. It was not done as a result of a negotiation with respect to Voisey's Bay. It has been something that has been developed between the Department of Finance and the Department of Mines and Energy over the last few years. Why it is in the Statement of Principles is to notify Inco that this is the new tax regime that will apply not only to them - this is not a Voisey's Bay tax - it will apply to them and, let me say it again, to every future mining operation in Newfoundland and Labrador.

It was not a part of the discussion at the negotiations. I can tell you that for a fact. They agreed to put it in the Statement of Principles as an acknowledgment that they knew that, while we did say 250 times before that the tax holiday that is still the current law - and a holiday, by the way, means no tax. In English, it means no tax. The no tax holiday, which is the current law, will disappear in the debate, and I am sure everybody here will vote for the new tax in November because it does away with the tax holiday and puts in a fairer generic tax regime for every mining operation of the future.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you this: We expect there will be numerous small and marginal mining operations that might spring up as a result of this, that will be able to open and be competitive because of the new tax regime, that we will gladly debate here in this Legislature in November, and I expect -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.

PREMIER GRIMES: Let me make a prediction, Mr. Speaker, to conclude, like I did with this one. We predicted who would vote against this before it even started. I will predicate now that in November every member of this Legislature will vote for the new tax regime because it is the right thing to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

We are now debating the Voisey's Bay resolution.

I recognize the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is indeed a pleasure and an honour to rise in this House today to have my say regarding the Voisey's Bay Statement of Principles. First of all, a comment. Following the issuance of the agreement last Tuesday, I had the opportunity to return to my district, Burgeo & LaPoile, to do consultation with people, business persons, community leaders, local service districts, and council members. Thanks to the Chamber of Commerce, we sponsored an event last Friday. The Premier was in attendance, as well as Dr. Gendron of Voisey's Bay Nickel, to inform the people of what was in the Statement of Principles and what was there for their benefit as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. I can assure the members of this House that I have not had one voice of dissent to the Statement of Principles that has been issued; not one from the District of Burgeo & LaPoile.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: We have heard comments from some of the Opposition members as if they do not have a right to speak here. I certainly don't agree with that. I think they have every right to. They have an obligation to speak concerning the Statement of Principles, what is in it, what they feel is not in it, and what they think ought to be in it. But, as my learned colleague here this morning said: Opposition - they have a requirement to object and they have an obligation to criticize, but it must be responsible. I have some concerns about some of the issues and how they have been dealt with in the past two or three days in that regard.

First of all, let me move on to, who put this together. We have had lots of comments about the lawyers and so on, but it was more than lawyers involved in the Statement of Principles. We have had mining experts, we have had the Minister of Mines and Energy involved, with his officials from the Department of Mines and Energy. We have had experts from the finance field, experts from the accounting fields, financial houses of Canada, but we did have, in fact, a very good legal team advising this Voisey's Bay Project. For example, we had McInnis, Cooper involved, two very good capable corporate lawyers - one of whom, I believe, is the uncle of the Leader of the Opposition -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. PARSONS: - a fantastic gentleman, a fantastic gentleman as a lawyer. We also have - now McInnis, Cooper is not a second-rate firm. It is well-known in this city, many years of expertise, but certainly corporate and commercial is one of them. They are in Atlantic Canada. We also had Stewart McKelvey advising us. Again, another major firm, a prominent firm in this city, in this Province, and in Atlantic Canada. They have many areas of expertise, one of the which, again, is corporate and commercial matters.

We also had our own in-house expertise in the Department of Justice; lawyers who are on the payroll of Justice but work on secondment to various departments such as Mines and Energy. In this case, a gentleman by the name of John McDonald who is first-class as an individual and a lawyer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: We had advice from Stikeman Elliott, a major corporate/commercial legal firm in this country, in Toronto, works out of Ontario, one of the best in the world. The gentleman in question, Mikhel Voore has written the book on corporate/commercial transactions, shareholder meetings, corporate entities, commercial and corporate financing. His CV is available on the Web.

That is who put this deal together. Now, some of these lawyers, I am sure, are worth their salt. We have heard some people say that they are not worth their salt.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: I think a few of these are worth their salt.

I have listened here, Mr. Speaker, for the last three days, attentively, without interruption, to anyone who spoke here during the last three days. Not a word did I say in rebuttal or anything else. I was listening because I was concerned. I have an obligation, as a citizen of this Province, to understand what is in this Statement of Principles. I have an obligation to understand it as an MHA. But, I also have an obligation as a minister of the Crown and, in particular, as the Minister of Justice.

I listened attentively because we have individuals on the other side of the House who are lawyers. Besides the expert team that we had and we relied upon, I wanted to hear what their opinions were from a legal perspective. I want that sense of comfort to know that if we have not done things right, where did we go wrong? I listened to the Leader of the Opposition because he is a lawyer of long standing. The critic for Mines and Energy, the Member for Lewisporte, former Premier, and the Leader of the NDP, all lawyers, and very capable lawyers, I might add. I listened attentively because I wanted to know and see if there was something that we missed here. I wanted their guidance and to give us that sense of comfort. Now, that doesn't mean that I only listen to the lawyers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: On the contrary. I listen to my colleagues and I listen to everyone else on the other side of the House as well, because, in my opinion, and I am a lawyer as well, but in my opinion commonsense often goes a lot further than a law degree. That is why I listen to them, not only as lawyers, but as persons.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I listened for that sense of comfort, that assistance I wanted to tell me where we have been misguided and where we had lost, and I am still waiting. Three days later and I am still waiting. I have heard lots of political rhetoric. I have heard three days of it. Three days of political rhetoric of off-ramp, of exits, of wide open, of driving a truck through. Well, I will tell you right now, from what I have heard there are several over there who do not deserve a driver's licence.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Now, I will deal with a couple of the legal issues here because that is very important to me. I want to deal with that. First of all, I will deal with the issue of Statement of Principles versus final binding agreements. It has been talked about in the media. It has been talked about in here a lot, and very important. Very good points. Somewhere in my democracy course, in my political science course and my constitutional law course, I missed something because I thought there were three branches of government in a democracy. I thought there was the executive branch. I thought there was the judiciary and I thought there was the Legislature, where we are now.

It is my understanding that the purpose of a Legislature is to take what the people want their policies to be, their governance to be, their principles to be, and to make laws that reflect that. That is the purpose of legislators, as my understanding. I did not know that it would be a requirement to be an MHA that you had to be a lawyer to be able to vet legal agreements, make legal arguments. You bring your commonsense to this House and that is what we are here for. We have had suggestions: we need the final, legal binding agreements so that everybody can tear them apart. A presumption that we are all going to be lawyers but that is certainly contrary to my understanding of democracy and how a Legislature works.

This Statement of Principles we have is comprehensive. Very, very comprehensive. So much so, I would suggest, that some cannot understand it because it is complex. It is jam-packed tight with detail but the fact that it is complex does not remove the responsibility to read it and to understand it; and not to misinterpret it and not to be misguided. We all have obligations to the people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: What is in this Statement of Principles and the big word - little word actually - is in section 3. It has been left out here conveniently by many people. It says what is in this Statement of Principles will be embodied in the final legal agreements. We are not going to change. It is a standard practice in corporate, commercial law. You have your Statement of Principles. You cannot move from A to B and change your intent. That's what this is. It is your written acknowledgment of the party's intent. I do not know if we ever had, in this House, ever been the subject of vetting legal contracts. We certainly did not do it in Hibernia. I do not believe we ever even had a Statement of Principles entered into this House, let alone final binding agreements. We did not do it in White Rose. We did not do it in Terra Nova. We do not do it in federal-provincial agreements. We did not do it in telephone contracts or anything else.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: This is not a vetting house for legal, binding agreements. We are here as legislators to make the decision based upon the facts and the details that have been laid before us. Do not use things to wimp out and avoid your responsibility of dealing with what we are required to do.

The second issue I would like to discuss because it has been bandied about, the guarantee. We do not have one. It is no good. It is not enforceable. It is not worth the paper it is written on. It is a sham. It is a useless document. It is only a lawsuit. That is the kind of commentary we have had in the last three days.

Well, lets look at the guarantee in section 25. There are two pieces to it, there are two paragraphs. Paragraph one says, and again it is very straightforward. We, Inco, are going to remove 355,000 tons of nickel from this Province. We, Inco, will return to this Province 355,000 tons of nickel. Now, that is pretty straight.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: As the Premier always says, words are very important.

Now, you go to paragraph two of section 25, and that is very crucial because in it it says: If we don't return it and we agree we have to return equivalent value, we are going to give you a right to sue, and the Opposition would have you believe that is all they have given us. There is more here, and as some would want to say, the devil is in the details. Indeed they are, but it is not a devil in this case. It is called protection. What this section 25 says: yes, we have a right to sue. In fact it goes further, it is like a criminal case in which they are saying we plead guilty. There is no issue of liability. They are saying if you are ever called upon to enforce this guarantee, we admit our guilt. The only issue that we are going to have is: How much do we owe you if this ever happens?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: In that regard, I will acknowledge there has been some concerns raised and suggestions made as to: Why don't we stick in a bond? Why didn't we have a performance bond? Why don't we have some financial security? That has been suggested. The only two good suggestions I have heard, but albeit they are good suggestions. There is an equally good reason why it is not here.

The Leader of the NDP refers to liquidated damages. We have used in this section a clause saying that if we end up in court they will pay us. They acknowledge, first of all, the guilt. They acknowledge that there has been substantial damage to us. Our question is to determine: What is the loss to this Province if they do not return the 350,000 tons of nickel? That is the issue. What is it worth in value to this Province? Therefore, we did not pick any number in 2002 dollars or estimate what it might be thirty, forty, fifty years out, what it is worth. We put in a clause here saying that they will pay us the full loss to the Province and the economy of the Province. What does that mean? It is not only the value of the concentrate, it is the value of the tax losses, it is the value of the job losses, it is the value of the losses in the service industry of this Province. I thought it was masterful. Normally, if you sue someone for breach of contract, as the lawyers would know, normally you are restricted. You can only sue for pure economic loss. I thought it was masterful. They have agreed to pay us not only for pure economic loss, they have left it wide open. Our courts will decide what we should get if they do not perform.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Why would we have twenty years? Why would we have a restricted amount in there now, like years ago we put in for the Upper Churchill when we did not have an escalator clause and we lost out? Why would we want to similarly restrict ourselves here as to what a dollar value would be of our loses? We want to keep it wide open. So, the guarantee is there. It is in writing. It is enforceable.

Performance based project. That word did not get mentioned in this House very much this week, but it is very important. We talked about stop lights, we talked about starts and finishes and everything else, but this is a performance based project and this Statement of Principles outlines it very clearly. Inco, if you do not perform at various steps you do not benefit. This is not a giving away of the shop. You are not getting in the shop unless you do certain things at every step.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: The ultimate tool here, the ultimate asset that Inco wants and needs to develop Voisey's Bay is the lease. That is what this is all about. They do not get a mining lease if they do not comply. They get stopped in 2006 if they do not do their obligations. They get stopped in 2008. They get stopped in 2009, 2010 and 2011. That isn't giving away. This is protection at every step of the way, that you dare not take advantage of us.

I also would point out that what is not said is as important sometimes as what is said. For example - the silence in the Opposition on this is very telling. No mention of the legal standard by which best efforts are decided. That is very well known by the Supreme Court of Canada, no comments on that. No mention of the test in section 3 of Schedule A which says that the Force Majeure clause can only be implemented in certain very extreme circumstances. No mention of third party verification requirements in this Statement of Principles. No mention that Force Majeure only suspends and does not eliminate Inco's requirement to perform.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: But, most importantly, Mr. Speaker, and most telling, is that in the ten days since this Statement of Principles has been in the public domain not one single, solitary piece of legal opinion from any corporate solicitor in Canada has been put forward to suggest that this is wrong.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: To suggest that this is contrary to legal soundness, that the legal propriety of this Statement of Principles is not proper, the legal enforceability is missing. Not one shred of it. The silence is deafening when I listen and look for the advice and comfort that I need from people who can tell me that I am on the right or the wrong track. I have not gotten that guidance.

Lawyers worth their salt, I think we have seen the lawyers worth their salt because we certainly have not seen any other kind.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion I believe we have a good deal. I believe we have a sound and enforceable deal. I believe this deal will benefit the Aboriginal community, the people of Labrador, the people of Placentia and Argentia, and the people of this Province. The naysayers and the political rhetoric has not diminished my belief that this is the right deal at the right time. My head, my heart and my stomach feel very comfortable with this deal, and I give it my full and unconditional support.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair would like to take the opportunity to welcome to the Speaker's gallery today, Mayor Bride McLennon of Placentia.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise with great pride today to speak on behalf of the people in the riding of Torngat Mountains. I guess, while we in our riding have caused a big uproar because Voisey's Bay is located in my district - we have caused a bit of confusion but a lot of good will.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, I want to speak on something that, to me, is far more important today, and that is people. I want to speak on the Aboriginal people who live closest to Voisey's Bay.

We have seen the Innu who were relocated. Mr. Speaker, it was not a question of whether they were relocated but rather where they were relocated to. After thirteen years of anger and frustration, the government of the day realized that they were right when they argued that in the place where they resettled they could never survive. The nation watched as we saw our children go through despair, hurt and anger.

We saw how the Inuit people from the North Coast of Labrador, Hebron and Okak and these places, were resettled. They were promised two things, Mr. Speaker, better housing and a better way of life. In 1996, when I became the member, in Nain we had as many as twenty-two people living in a two and three bedroom house. They were promised a better way of life. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you some of the anger and the frustrations and hurt that they had to go through. Nobody will ever know.

I have heard people in every part of this Province talk of out-migration, and I have heard mothers and dads say how they watched their sons and daughters get aboard a car, load a U-Haul, and how it tore the heart out of them to bundle their little grandchildren up early in the morning and put them aboard the car to catch a ferry to go on.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to everyone in the House of Assembly today, and in this Province, that hurt and that anger and that emptiness that they felt can never compare to having to travel back to the riding of Torngat Mountains and attend the funeral of one of our brightest and best because of a lack of infrastructure and jobs, that they felt that their lot in life was not worth living for.

Mr. Speaker, we are building for our future and we want to put our past behind us, but it is very difficult. Yesterday it hit home as I watched and heard the Leader of the Opposition say how he and his caucus had travelled around the Province. Not one of his caucus set foot in Labrador.

He talked last night and mentioned every bay in Newfoundland, not one reference to Labrador and the people who live there. I listened to the Member for St. John's West and the Member for Ferryland. What hurt me most of all was when they talked about the royalties and they said that, by the time the Province pays the Aboriginals, there is nothing left for us, meaning that the Aboriginal people who live in my riding - according to them - are not considered people of this Province.

I saw the Leader of the Opposition rise yesterday and he said: I have not seen the IBAs that the Innu and Inuit have negotiated with Voisey's Bay. He went on to say: I cannot advise them. I will quote that again. He said: I cannot advise them if that is a good deal or a bad deal.

Mr. Speaker, a prime example of, oh greater than thou.

I stood here today, Mr. Speaker, and hear how the Leader of the Opposition talked about the Aboriginal people, and that to him they do not count. If that is his outlook on the people in Northern Labrador, our seniors, our women, our children, and if that is his outlook on life, I will say this to him - and I am very serious - if he believes in the Supreme Being, for the statements he made in reference to the Aboriginal people, I would suggest that when he goes to bed tonight, that he not only bow his head in hope of forgiveness, but bow his head in shame.

Mr. Speaker, this deal is going to change the face of Labrador forever. It is going to change the way of life for the Aboriginal people who once fished and trapped. We saw it fade away, but it is still the bounty of the land, through this mining project that is going to give prosperity to our people on the North Coast of Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the Aboriginal people were the first to come to the table. Because of the IBAs, Voisey's Bay Nickel would not negotiate with the Province. I guess it is ironic that it is these people who, on Monday, will ratify their IBAs so that the project can move ahead.

I want to congratulate President Barbour and his people. I want to congratulate Peter Penashue of the Innu. I also want to pass along my congratulations to President Todd Russell of the Metis Association. While they were not at the table, they too will avail of trading dollars and I am sure they will get good employment for their people.

Mr. Speaker, I want to pay tribute to a woman, an Aboriginal woman, Isabel (inaudible) from Nain who was the chief negotiator and took on the giant, Inco, in negotiating IBA for her (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my family, my wife and my two daughters, because I guess I was in a little pickle from time to time, being the Member for Torngat Mountains, being a member of the Liberal caucus, and having two land claims negotiations going on, two IBAs going on, and the Province trying to get a deal. Mr. Speaker, I always had one thing in mind. It was people that we were talking about, people we were negotiating for.

Mr. Speaker, some great statesman made the statement: when you are going through hell, keep on going. There is a little lady on the North Coast of Labrador. She is eighty-four years old. She is my mom. If there is one sad thing about my childhood, Mr. Speaker, it is that I lost my father when I was eight years old. My mom - the three girls were older, two were married and one was going through high school, and there were also three boys - she raised us on $155 a month widow's allowance. She never served on any councils or made any famous remarks, but there is one thing she taught me and my brothers. It was this: When you are going through a difficult time and you are down and out, then you take the time to count some of the many blessings that have come your way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: I can say to you today: Mom, if you are watching, I am proud of you. I hope some day that my children can be one-tenth as proud of me as I am of you.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the people in my riding. I guess one of the blessings in life I have is to be their member. They have given me the opportunity to come into this House of Assembly. They believe I came here as an equal person, to represent their concerns and their needs.

Mr. Speaker, this is not a perfect deal. It is not going to solve all the problems in this Province. Mr. Speaker, certainly Voisey's Bay is not going to solve all the problems in the riding of Torngat Mountains. We have many, many mountains to climb and many problems to overcome.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our negotiating team who has done such a tremendous job for the Province. I want to thank my colleagues in this caucus who, since 1996, have shown me respect and given me full co-operation and have helped me in many ways.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say thank you to the Premier for letting me, an Aboriginal, be a part of his caucus, in his caucus, in his government, where every child, regardless of where you live, is a part of this team and a part of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Mr. Speaker, one of our greatest songwriters and singers in Labrador, Harry Martin, wrote: There is a land of boundless beauty where the untamed rivers run, and majestic snow-capped mountains rise to meet the morning sun.

Mr. Speaker, when the vote is finished here today I am heading back to Goose Bay and tomorrow morning I am leaving Goose Bay and I am going to fly over these untamed rivers, I am going to fly over these majestic mountains. If the weather is good I am going to see the sun shine across this Province. Friday evening I am going to speak at the graduation of the high school in Hopedale. Saturday morning I am jumping a freight plane and at 12:00 o'clock I am speaking to the women's group at Makkovik, and that evening I am going to attend a graduation in my hometown of Makkovik.

Mr. Speaker, it has been a long time, but it is going to be a good time, because I am going to be able to tell the children in my riding that there is a future for us, that we will become masters of our own dynasty, and that we will play a part.

Mr. Speaker, I want to end of by making a quote. I am not sure who the author is, but it goes like this:

"My candle burns at both ends; It will not last the night; But, ah, my foes, and, oh, my friends - It gives a lovely light."

For the people, the Aboriginal people and our young people in the riding of Torngat Mountains, Mr. Speaker, our candle has never - has never! has never! - shone brighter.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: On a Point of Privilege, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader on a point of privilege.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am reluctant to stand. I picked up, during Question Period, two comments. One by the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs and one by the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. Just to be sure of what I heard, I went down, as I did yesterday when I raised this point on the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, to listen to the audio tapes to see if I heard right. On the way back, I was just told that the minister admitted freely what he said, outside this House.

During Question Period, the Leader of the Opposition was asking questions about procurement opportunities for all companies and all people in Newfoundland and Labrador and the Premier gave his answer. That is part of the written record. But what is not, Mr. Speaker, part of the written record, but certainly is part of the verbal record that members on this side heard, people in the media heard, which is truly contemptuous and in anybody's view unparliamentary - and I can quote the references to Beauchesne or to Marleau, but I think that is unnecessary because I believe, Mr. Speaker, you know them yourselves.

The comment I refer to is that, while the Leader of the Opposition was asking his questions, both the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs and the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs shouted out that he was a racist. I find that unacceptable and I believe that any thinking, living human being and Newfoundlander and Labradorian will also find that unacceptable. I ask both the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs and the Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs to do the right thing now, to stand in their places and apologize to the Leader of the Opposition for calling him a racist.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister for Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, I have no problem whatsoever to withdraw that and say that, if I did, then I am sorry for it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It was not in reference to the individual, it was in reference to his statement, but I withdraw the word if that is the pleasure of the House, and also apologize.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a great pleasure for me to bring to a close this special debate that we have had for the last three days, an historic event in and of itself, Mr. Speaker; and just to have all members acknowledge that this debate was not a requirement of this House. There was absolutely nothing that required the government, the mandated government, to bring a Statement of Principles on a business deal to this Legislature. Mr. Speaker, it is a reflection again and it demonstrates the willingness of this government and its absolute commitment - because we keep our commitments - to be open and accountable to the people of the Province and to this Legislature for what we do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I believe it has been readily acknowledged that this not a new issue, this is not a recent issue, it has been around for some six years. I believe the Opposition critic said it best a couple of days ago when he was the lead speaker for the Official Opposition. He said he got elected in 1996, and I believe his comment was that in every session, and almost every day since he has been here, there has been either a question or something debated about Voisey's Bay. It has dominated the political landscape in the Province and it has dominated the debate in this Legislature for the last six years; and before that, in 1995, with a debate in which the Liberal government brought in the law that required processing to a full and finished product, that has been referred to by many other speakers. It is not new, but it is important and it is important to bring it to a close and move on.

I certainly appreciate the attendance, the attention, the interest and the involvement of all members. We pass along our best wishes to the members, due to their health issues, who cannot be here. We wish them very well. I think he is coming in for the vote. I understand he could not participate in the debate. We do wish him very well and we are pleased to see him come in for the vote.

Everyone, Mr. Speaker, has chosen to use their own time, as is the norm and the wont in a parliamentary democracy, to make their own comments for their own reasons with respect to this debate. As always, what we understand as elected parliamentarians, is that it is the people of the Province, our constituents, the ones who send us here, those people will be the final judges to the words that we have spoken and the subsequent deeds that we follow up on after this debate.

We came here, we understood, and we volunteered to come here. Let me say it again, we wanted to come here because we understood there were some concerns. We wanted to have them debated and raised in the people's Legislature because, when I made the announcement ten days ago now, we said it would be the scrutinized and we welcomed the scrutiny. We have had it for three days, which the Government House Leader indicates, by normal parliamentary debate would be the equivalent of a full month of debate in this Legislature, for the time that has been given to this debate and the rules of this House. We came here to address the concerns and to express our reasons, as individual members, as to why we find it possible either to support or not support this particular proposition.

As I recounted, I believe I heard six definitive matters raised as concerns as a result of Question Period. There were some other, as the Minister of Justice pointed out, references to political rhetoric. I will just sort of capsulize them as this: There was a concern about the Chairman and CEO of Inco using the phrase material difference, and a suggestion that that meant the whole Statement of Principles might change. That has been addressed and dealt with. There was a suggestion that the Statement of Principles is a completely meaningless document. I think that has been exposed for what it is, as a concern over the last few days.

There was a concern raised about the issue of suitable financing and whether or not that means that anything or nothing can proceed. I believe that has been debated to death and I believe the people in the Province have a better understanding as to whether that is a legitimate concern or not. There have been concerns raised about technical feasibility studies being required for certain components at certain points in the deal. Glad that they are raised. Glad that the questions are answered. I believe the people of the Province have a better sense of comfort today than they did when we started three days ago.

Concerns raised in Question Period again today about equalization; equalization, a non-related debate, something that I have led the charge in the country. At the Premier's conference last summer I got unanimous support from every political leader in the country of all stripes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Progressive Conservative, New Democratic and Liberal, every single one of them unanimously calling upon the Government of Canada to make some changes because we do not believe, none of us in this Legislature, regardless of political stripe, that it is working in the best interests of Newfoundland and Labrador today. Raised in this debate as if we shouldn't do this deal because equalization is not fixed. We have debated that and we have chosen to move on because we are going to have to fight that fight many times over.

Also, some concerns with respect to no fund as a remedy, and the Minister of Justice dealt with the advantages of going to court in a current day time, in current dollars and a current circumstance with no limitations, and a broad-based ability to seek our remedy if there is ever a breach.

So, all those issues have been raised and dealt with. I understand, Mr. Speaker, all of them have been fully debated and that the Members in this House accept now that we have fuller facts than we did when we started three days ago. I believe we have the real facts on the first of those four and there were some choices with respect to the last two, to proceed or not proceed as a result of equalization, which we cannot control, and whether or not we should have a fund instead of a legal remedy which was explained by the Minister of Justice.

We could, if we wanted to, continue on and have everybody speak and the debate would go like a rerun, just like a late night movie. I am sure the members opposite would say the same things they said two days ago. I am sure our members would, probably, want to say the same things they said. Those who want to find a reason to oppose it, they can find it. There is lots of comfort for them to take if they want to pick out a particular reason to oppose.

There are many old sayings and adages, Mr. Speaker, that I have heard: phrases like, there are none so blind as who will not see, none so deaf as who will not hear, and that a person convinced against his will is not convinced still. We did not come here to try convince anybody to vote a particular way. We came here to hear everybody, to listen to everybody, to address the concerns, and to then, provide an opportunity for everyone to make their own decision with a genuine real, absolute, free vote, their own minds, as to how they want to proceed with respect to this issue. I am delighted to see that happen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: I think we gained some useful insights from Opposition members in terms of the discussion raised. The first one I reference is - I believe I heard members say, some of at least - that unless there is an opportunity for everybody, in every community, in every nook and cranny, in every bay of Newfoundland and Labrador, unless there is a direct, tangible, absolute guarantee that somebody in every community is going to benefit directly from this project, then we should not let anybody benefit. I believe I heard that. Mr. Speaker, I believe I did hear it because it was in Question Period again today. Some members say, if the equalization program is not fixed - we would never do this unless the equalization program was fixed first. I am sure I heard that said; and the people can judge. Hansard, the written record will show. The television debate showed those who were watching. I am sure it was said, Mr. Speaker. I believe one speaker even said that he was proud to vote against it.

Mr. Speaker, I can understand, and we can understand, and everybody in the Province can understand regretting to have to vote against it. Maybe being sad to have to vote against it because it is not what that person or members wanted it to be, that it is incomplete in some way, in their view. Maybe with apologies they would vote against it; apologies to the Aboriginal peoples, apologies to the people of Labrador, apologies to the people over the Island, apologies to the people in Argentia, Placentia, Dunville, and that area, who are so looking forward to moving ahead and succeeding. But, no, no, there was one member who did not say: I regret that I have to vote against this. There is one member who said I am proud to vote against this; proud to hold some people back. And the most telling thing - because there are some insights in it, more telling than anything. When that was said by one member, a full caucus stood and cheered. So I guess they all agreed. They stood and cheered and applauded. I guess they all agreed with the sentiment. I will say no more about that.

This group of individuals, on this side of the House, who have all come to their own individual conclusions, because that is the way we operate, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: This group of individuals here are proud too. Let me tell you why we are proud, because we are all equal, every single one of us. We got here exactly the same way.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: We have been given, everyone of us, our own free right to think this through, to work it through, to consult with trusted friends, advisers and family and make a decision that each person thought was in the best interests of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, we are proud to proceed. We are proud to find a way not to hold ourselves back, but to move forward, to move on, to make some things happen, proud to see the Aboriginal peoples of Labrador, in particular - because, do you know what they are going to do? They are going to break through.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: They are going to break through, Mr. Speaker, no doubt about it, just like we hope to break through in the Canadian federation sooner rather than later. They are poised to do it now, right now, and we are going to be very proud to let it happen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, we are proud to have struck a balance. There are competing interests, there are choices to make, and we are proud to have met our commitments. We say that without any reservation because we have, we know it in our hearts and souls that we have, and we go around with our heads high because we absolutely have met our commitments and we are very proud to make it happen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I believe it reflects how we have operated as a team of equals in the last fifteen or sixteen months or so, because that is exactly, again, what we are. It is how and why we have succeeded in meeting many other commitments that we made to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, starting with a significant one like introducing fuel price regulation. The Commissioner was introduced here today. He is accompanied by a gentleman from Hawaii who is here visiting to look at how we have done those things and see if we can learn from them and they can learn from us. That is happening.

We did the Child and Youth Advocate, the Ombudsman. We found a way with the Minister of Mines and Energy to maximize opportunities and benefits for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and get the White Rose deal done, to revitalize the Burin Peninsula, to keep that sector moving forward, to keep the economy moving, to keep employing people, to keep meeting the needs of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. We found a way to trust in ourselves, to believe in ourselves and to submit the boundary dispute to an arbitration because we knew we had the case. We had the best legal advice, just like we had in this case; the same kind of lawyers, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: We have gotten a commitment, Mr. Speaker, from the Prime Minister that he will review, for ourselves and our good friends in Nova Scotia, not our competitors, our good friends in Nova Scotia, the Atlantic Accord, which was a right and proper document signed by the previous Progressive Conservative administration. They did the right thing and I acknowledge it, absolutely. It said we should be the principal beneficiary and everyone in the Province knows we are not.

Finally, the Prime Minister has written both myself and Premier Hamm and said: I will review those documents. He is having them reviewed to see if the political intent of them, not the legalities that have tied them up for a few years now, but the political intent to have the principal beneficiaries, right here in Newfoundland and Labrador and over in Nova Scotia, is actually met. It is under review now as we speak and we are looking forward to that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, those are some of the reasons, because we have made some things happen, because we have made some commitments and we have met them. We absolutely met them. Because of that, those are the kinds of reasons that this Province, little old Newfoundland and Labrador, is leading the country in economic growth.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: That is why those things are happening.

Mr. Speaker, the greatest measure of that, because the Opposition wants to talk about it, the greatest indicator of that, is that we have led the country in job growth and creation so that individuals can feel good about themselves because they work. They can provide for themselves and their families and be greater contributors into their communities and therefore for the whole Province. We are leading the country in job growth. There are more people working in Newfoundland and Labrador today, as I stand in this Legislature, than ever in recorded history since Stats Canada has been keeping the statistics.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, now we have an opportunity to continue that pattern of growth, maximizing opportunities and benefits for our people and continuing to move on. Voisey's Bay will give us the next step up the ladder. I have said before, it is not the answer, it is not the cure-all, it is not the panacea. You will never hear that kind of talk, not from me. You will not hear these sunshine talks from a fellow like me. We have heard them before. You will not hear it from me. You will hear realism. This is a great step, another rung up the ladder and we are going to keep moving one step at a time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, next on the agenda, because Labrador - and I have said this, this next decade and probably beyond is going to belong to us - Labrador will lead the charge. Voisey's Bay now, with a real impact for the next thirty, forty, fifty, sixty, seventy years. After that, the Trans-Labrador Highway, Phase III, is going to open up all of Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: It is going to be done in six years, $17 million a year, going to be done in six years with the agreement and the approval of our Aboriginal partners who we respect, who we will work with, and whose consent we go and seek. That is the next thing we will be asking our Aboriginal leaders to agree to: whether or not we can proceed with the Trans-Labrador Highway. Following that, forestry development in Labrador, again with the permission and approval of our Aboriginal partners, if we have not already concluded a land claim. Primarily, first and foremost, for the benefit of Labradorians. Of course, if Labradorians prosper, so do we all. If any one community or any one group of people prosper, so do we all. It is going to happen in Labrador. Then the Lower Churchill, with the consent and approval of our Aboriginal partners.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, make no doubt about it, Labrador is going to lead our Province in the next decade. This Province will continue to lead this country in economic growth and jobs for people, real opportunities for the young people, that the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation talked about this morning. The young boy on the bike in Placentia, coming out of school, the opportunity might be there for him. It wasn't there for his mom and dad, but it might be there for him now. The Opposition would say: He just promised a job to a youngster down in Placentia. Isn't that shocking? Because that is the way some of these people talk. I do not talk like that. I just said exactly what the fact is; there might be an opportunity for that young fellow.

Mr. Speaker, this Province will lead the country. It is on an unmistakable, undeniable path to a position of greater prominence and self-reliance in Canada. Then, of course, on the Island, natural gas is going to come on shore. Other things will develop and will continue to proceed. They are the kinds of things that will help us grow the economy, grow the provincial Treasury and then do things like take care of the ferry needs in the Province, take care of the elder and senior needs in Western Newfoundland, Conception Bay North, here in St. John's, probably through private-public partnering. The minister and a committee are already looking into that.

Mr. Speaker, today, though, we vote on Voisey's Bay, and for those who cannot stand with us, we understand that and we accept that. We do understand and accept that. We each answer to our own constituents over time for this. History, of course, will record what happens in twenty years, thirty years, or forty years. We have this confidence, that regardless of who votes which way in this Legislature, we have the confidence that the people of Newfoundland and Labrador will understand what we are doing, support what we are doing, because we want them to grow and prosper so that we, as a group, in Newfoundland and Labrador, can grow and prosper and take our rightful place in Canada. We are all proud Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. We are all proud Canadians. This is going to be one step up the rung of the ladder to get us to where we all want to go.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The House, I believe, is ready for the question.

All those in favour of the resolution, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the resolution, ‘nay'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the resolution carried.

AN HON. MEMBER: Division.

MR. SPEAKER: Division.

Bring in the members.

Division

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Are we ready for the vote?

All those in favour of the resolution, please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Premier; the hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs; the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General; the hon. the Minister of Education; the hon. the Minister of Environment; the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs; Mr. Walsh; the hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury Board; the hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy; the hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation; the hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods; the hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services; Mr. Joyce; the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture; the hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation; the hon. the Minister of Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education and Minister Responsible for the Status of Women; the hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands; the hon. the Minister of Labour; the hon. the Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs; the hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment; Mr. Mercer; Ms Hodder; Mr. Andersen; Ms Jones; Mr. Sweeney; Mr. Butler; Mr. Manning; Mr. Collins.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the resolution, please rise.

CLERK: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition; Mr. Ed Byrne; Mr. Ottenheimer; Mr. Shelley; Mr. Jack Byrne; Mr. Rideout; Mr. Sullivan; Ms Sheila Osborne; Mr. Fitzgerald; Mr. Hodder; Mr. Wiseman; Mr. Hunter; Mr. Tom Osborne; Mr. Taylor; Mr. Hedderson; Mr. Young; Mr. French; Mr. Harris.

Mr. Speaker, twenty-eight ‘ayes' and eighteen ‘nays'.

MR. SPEAKER: I declare the resolution carried.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair would like to remind the visitors to the gallery that this House has a long-standing tradition that we invite people in to observe the proceedings in this House, but - and it is a long-standing parliamentary tradition that we ask people to respect - under no circumstances are they to participate in any way, either by applause or by standing or by demonstration of any sort. I know, on this occasion, people may be thrilled, or whatever the case might be, but under no circumstances do we want to see a precedent being set by people in the gallery. We ask that you respect this tradition and that you not take part or show disfavour or favour with any of the proceedings that may happen in this House. Again, I remind all visitors to the gallery that this is a long-standing parliamentary tradition.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: I suppose, Mr. Speaker, we should have told them before.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank hon. members for a terrific debate over the last three days, and I want to thank the Opposition for agreeing to the procedures and the process that we used. As hon. members will know, this was a special debate and we had to agree to procedures for the debate to take place, which it did today.

I want especially to thank the Opposition House Leader and the Leader of the New Democratic Party because, without their agreement, we could not have carried out this debate today in the manner that we did. So, I want to thank the Opposition and I want to congratulate everybody for what I thought was a marvelous debate, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If only he had thanked me last night. He didn't, and certainly in his speech today he didn't.

On a serious note, this is an important debate, clearly. In recognition of that, there was some give and take in terms of the rules that we all operate under. It is fair to say, and I am happy to say, that, almost to a person, members in this House on both sides operated within the spirit and intent of the rules that we had negotiated and what we felt ultimately was a fair arrangement for everybody involved.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I want certainly to congratulate my own members, obviously, and our leader, for the level that he brought to the debate. We look forward any time, on any issue, to debate any policies or projects or issues that this government may bring forward in the limited time that they have left to them.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to go on record as saying that everybody made a significant contribution to the debate. I have to disagree with the Premier, though; I don't think it was long enough. I think if we had more time we perhaps would have gotten more answers. We started getting some answers about the financing today, but there would have been more opportunity to do that. Nevertheless, we did agree to the procedure and we have had a full opportunity to state our points of view.

I want to congratulate all hon. members on their contribution to this debate about an important issue that faces all of us and is going to affect all of us all the way down the road for our future. Hopefully we will have more opportunities to debate the consequences of this. We will, in the fall, when the legislation comes forward, and we will continue to perform our respective roles as legislators in this House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I move that this House on its rising do adjourn, and that this House do now adjourn to the call of the Chair.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned to the call of the Chair.